 Whether or not you enjoy this movie might end up having more to do with whether or not you mind that the trailer is completely misleading. Like... COMPLETELY misleading. With that said, the surprises the film holds are really quite genuine, and I didn't see it taking the turn that it did; a turn which I still can't quite figure out if I like or not. Although this turn is rather clever, I feel like I'd have liked to have seen what I expected. Anyway, I can't very well talk about what the movie is ACTUALLY about without spoiling that twist, so if you haven't seen it and care, check it out before reading on. If you have seen it, or don't care either way, go nuts. This is your spoiler alert.
Here we have a boy named Lucas (Levi Miller) who, despite his looking old enough to take care of himself (seriously, he was born in September, 2002, making him 15 by the time this was released) , still has a babysitter named Ashley (Olivia DeJong). He takes a liking to her, and tries rather creepily and desperately to get with her while she's babysitting him around the holidays. He and his best friend, Garrett (Ed Oxenbould) even go so far as to stage a break-in, which is the pinpoint moment that the film makes it's little twist. Once they're caught, Lucas kinda just has enough of being treated like a little kid and goes off the freakin' deep end. So, by the trailer, we're pretty well convinced that Luke, Ashley and Garrett are defending the house 'Home Alone' style, but with real consequences, which WOULD make for a pretty over the top comedic blood-bath that would never allow us to see 'Home Alone' in the same way again. But instead, it just turns into a hostage movie, with Lucas of all people at the wheel. Now, as disappointing as that was, I have to admit that Miller's performance here is nothing short of awesome. If I were to draw a comparison, I'd have to say that a LOT of his inspiration had to come from Alex from 'A Clockwork Orange'. If something goes wrong, he loses his shit, but if something goes his way, he embraces the moment with such satisfaction. The kid's an unlikable psycho, but definitely makes a great movie villain, and I'd say his performance is what stands out the most here. You can just tell he's having a ton of fun with it. Unfortunately, however, the film does stray from something that could have been fun and original and turns it into 'The Strangers' or 'The Purge' with similar situations. It also reminded me a lot of a reverse-'Babysitter' (the movie I reviewed around Halloween) with the kid being the psycho instead of the sitter. In that whole respect, it was relatively dull, but to it's credit, it maintained a bit of unpredictability as far as character fates go. It's a passable, fun little horror movie for the holidays that could be compared to something like 'Black Christmas', but much less scary (seriously, is there a creepier stalker than Billy's big stupid eyeball?) If you're into that sort of thing, give it a look. If not, stick with your family favorites and leave this kind of thing for Halloween. 3/5
0 Comments
 When I first saw the trailer for this, I was pretty convinced that this could be as good as last year's 'The Night Before'. It was a Christmas movie combined with a party movie, and it looked like it could be fun. But then, I watched it.
The plot centers on the threat of a closing branch of a company called Zenotek. Failing to meet their quarterly quota, Intermediate CEO, Carol Vanstone (Jennifer Aniston) threatens to shut them down. But her brother, Clay (TJ Miller) and his friend Josh (Jason Bateman) propose a chance at partnering with a man named Walter Davis (Courtney B Vance); one of the city's big financial giants. If it can be done, the branch can be saved. The plan Josh and Clay end up coming up with is to show Walter a good time at their office Christmas party. Surely, if they show him the time of his life, he'll want to partner with them, thus saving the company. So, overall, the film is just kinda forgettable. It's not without a few giggles, but nothing here was really laugh-out-loud funny to me. In comparison to something like 'The Night Before', at least that had Seth Rogen tripping out through the whole movie and reacting to various things, plus the character of Mr. Green. Like them or hate them, they each made their part very memorable. This had nothing that stuck out like that, and it was essentially just a party movie with a "save the rec center" plot to it. I thought it was interesting considering how raunchy this got in some parts that there was no shock value to any of it for me. I guess 'Project X' set the bar pretty high for that sort of thing in a party movie. It's strange, I like a good party movie, and it's not really like this was extremely lacking, but there was SOMETHING missing here for me. I can't quite put my finger on it. If I had to guess, it probably has something to do with a complete lack of character development. The film is basically just two guys and a mean older sister, and we don't end up knowing a whole hell of a lot about them. Or what about some of the side characters. Rob Corddry is in it here and there, but he's such an after thought. I mean, what's his story at all? We just know he works there with them. It takes away from really caring much about how it all ends. But there's some side story stuff too. There's a desperate loser who brings a prostitute to the party, and a kindly mother of one who can't find the right man. They're the only two side stories going on, so I'll give you three guesses as to what happens with all of that. Another thing is that most of the party ideas utilized here have either been done before, or they're just not all that special. You've got the ice luge, you've got the Slip n Slide, and at one point TJ Miller hands out gifts dressed as Santa... but, a few bonus points for making Santa's chair the Throne of Swords from 'Game of Thrones'. Also not particularly original, but... still awesome. In the end, I probably wouldn't add this to my list of favourite party movies. Which is a shame, because when it comes to that category, I don't tend to be too hard to please. 2/5  I dunno exactly why, but this was one we didn't really visit as a family. My best guess is that it lies somewhere between the potential for Santa Claus to not be real and the fact that we already had some well-established classics we'd watch.
The story involves a man named Kris Kringle (Edmund Gwenn) who comes to the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade only to find that the Santa they hired is a lush. He replaces him for the parade, and is later asked to be the Santa Claus for Macy's, which he agrees to. Meanwhile, Doris Walker (Maureen O'Hara), the coordinator of the Thanksgiving Day Parade, is raising her daughter, Susan (Natalie Wood) to not believe in such nonsense as Santa Claus or any sort of fairy tales. However, her attorney neighbour, Fred Gailey (John Payne) cares a lot for Susan, and believes that the way she's being raised is taking away her childlike sense of wonder. So, upon taking Susan to visit Santa (Kris), she starts to become convinced that perhaps there is a Santa after all. The rest of the film leans heavily on Kris, being a very sweet, kindhearted old man who believes himself to really be Santa Claus. As a result, after beginning to send Macy's shoppers to other stores to find what they're looking for at a bargain, the whole thing turns into Kris against the world as some aim to have him committed for believing that he's Santa, which, as some small-minded adults are concerned, is preposterous, and potentially dangerous. Though this one is pretty new to me, and perhaps a little dated, I did manage to find quite a bit of Christmas magic to it. One can't help but fall in love with Gwenn's performance as an incredibly convincing Santa Claus in this, but the charm doesn't stop there. This film isn't just to make kids believe there's a Santa, it's to make adults believe there is as well. When I found out Santa wasn't real, it was explained to me that the figure of Santa wasn't necessarily real, but that's an easier thing for kids to wrap their heads around, as it's something physical. I was then told that what Santa really is, is that feeling of magic, wonder, joy and spirit of giving around Christmas time. In other words, Santa was the spirit of Christmas. And as far as I'm concerned, no better film portrays that than this one. 4/5  No Christmas movie binge-watching would be complete the comedic antics of 'National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation'! It has pretty much become my #1 all-time favourite Christmas movie. To this day, I still claim it to be the best thing National Lampoon has ever come up with. And that includes a lot of titles!
Clark Griswold (Chevy Chase) is a true family man on his third on-screen adventure ('Vacation', and 'European Vacation' predating it). However, this time it's all about staying home and having a good old fashioned family Christmas. As Clark's luck would have it, though, the overall dysfunction of the family and the fact that his Christmas bonus cheque is late makes for an overall stressful holiday season. The plot of the whole thing is basic enough, but I feel like no other Christmas movie can portray the potential stresses of a family holiday in such a funny way. Throughout the film, Clark has to deal with an incredibly harsh Father-in-Law, Christmas lights that won't work properly, a goofy redneck Brother-in-Law, snobby neighbors, a rather odd Christmas dinner, and so much more. There's probably something in here for anyone to relate to along the way. It's amazing how many times I've actually watched this movie and can still get some great laugh-out-loud results from it. But it's not without that bit of Christmas warmth that a movie like it needs, but it's not enough to bring one to any tears. Directed by the late John Hughes, it's a great balance of hilarity and heart. There are quite a few names in this one too, including younger Johnny Galecki and Juliette Lewis as Rusty and Audrey (the Griswold kids), Randy Quaid as Eddie, William Hickey as Uncle Lewis along with his wife Bethany, played by original Betty Boop voice Mae Questel and Julia Louis-Dreyfus as one of the neighbors. I would only recommend it to watch as a family if a little raunchiness is okay. It's safe enough, I'd imagine, but be forewarned about some colorful language and a very attractive woman who strips on a diving board (although nothing is really shown). But if you're all good with all of that, I'd actually highly recommend this one for a very good Christmas comedy around the holidays that has withstood the test of time in a big way! 5/5  I remember back in 2000 when this was first coming out being rather excited about it. I mean, a live-action Grinch film that featured Jim Carrey in the title role sounded, and looked really promising.
For those who may be unfamiliar with the story, essentially the Grinch (Jim Carrey) is this green monster who lives up in a mountain. For his own reasons, he hates Christmas with the flaming passion of a thousand suns. One Christmas Eve, the Grinch travels down to the village of Whoville to steal everything Christmas-related from each and every home. The basic idea, when it comes right down to it, is that when they wake up on Christmas Day, Christmas will be ruined and they'll shut up and stop bothering him with their constant noise. But as cruel as it all sounds, the whole thing ends up being a very deep and heartfelt lesson about Christmas and what it's all about. The original version of the story, narrated by Boris Karloff, was always a great Christmas classic for most to watch around the holidays, and quite franly, it still is. It does everything the live-action film does, does it better, quicker, and more effeciently, ultimately delivering the exact same message. The main difference in the two is that one is a made-for-TV half-hour cartoon special, and one is an hour-and-a-half-long movie. So in the end, it all depends on what you're after. The movie has a bit more back story to it, but it's mostly unnecessary. They delve into what triggered his hatred for Christmas, but in the TV special, the lack of that was kinda what made things so good. Your imagination could make any old reason up. I remember just thinking he was an asshole who came to his senses one Christmas morning when he realized what Christmas was all about. However, in the film, the whole thing is based on a love interest and being bullied. But I always thought the Grinch should be the bully. Not the guy who was picked on. Maybe he just hated Christmas because he was a crotchety old grouch. He didn't need a whole big back story reason for it all. That said, a LOT of people still enjoy this movie, and watch it every year. I'd be lying if I said there weren't aspects of it I actually really like. Jim Carrey does play the role really well... sometimes... His naturally cartoonish antics just make it all spring to life, the voice is good, and the facial expressions he uses are spot on. On the other hand, there are times he gets pretty irritating. He ends up being like the kind of guy you'd become friends with, but then immediately regret it. To the film's credit, when it came out, it was a solid Christmas movie. It brought a lot of the magic across in a lot of different ways. A Christmas movie gets pretty powerful when it's based in a fantasy world. The special effects used were relatively new to us at the time too, so the whole thing looked pretty awesome. Hell, I even remember getting goosebumps when you saw the Grinch smile in the trailer. But now, the effects of movies like 'Avatar' or the new 'Star Wars' films, or even the 'Lord of the Rings' trilogy have knocked these special effects on their proverbial ass. This was actually my first time watching it through in well over a decade, and sadly, it wasn't quite as good as I remembered. Anyway, it's still a perfectly passable film despite it's flaws. It's still a movie people watch every year, and enjoy, and that's perfectly fine. Whatever gets you into the Christmas spirit. But I'd be lying to the general public if I'd recommend the movie over the TV special. It's the same story in about 22 minutes, it's cute, it's funny, it gets the exact same message across, and it still runs strong today. The movie's decent, but the special is better overall. 3/5  In celebration of the first day of Hanukkah, I thought I'd take a look back on what is pretty much the one and only Hanukkah movie out there (although I'm sure I'm probably mistaken). But just how worth it is this title? Over the years, I've heard almost nothing but bad about it, but I honestly remember liking it pretty well upon my first viewing.
Well, let's get our basic plot out of the way first. Davey (Adam Sandler) is a drunken asshole idiot who goes around the beginning of the movie singing about how much he hates everything and everyone. He causes a disturbance, and is sentenced to community service once things are worked out between the court and a little old man named Whitey (also Sandler) who comes to Davey's defense in court. Davey is made to be the coach of the elementary school basketball team, and slowly seems to redeem himself. However, his past sort of just keeps coming back to haunt him and piss him off, so he's basically an asshole all the way through the movie. A "Scrooge" of sorts, if you will. And therein lies the true problem with the movie - despite it's somewhat happy (and highly predictable) ending, the movie is just kinda mean-spirited and full of adult humor, which includes swearing to some extent. On top of that, there's a bit too much crude toilet humour going on here that's plain unnecessary, and thrown in for a cheap giggle. Just how bad? Well, how about when a bunch of deer start laughing and pooping all over the place just because, y'know, shit happens? Or Whitey's sister having a seizure and farting the whole time doing it? Toilet humor can be great if it's done well, but here, it's just cheap and you have to wonder why it's there. The movie isn't without any heart whatsoever though. There are some reasonably warm moments here. But when all said and done, you predict these things to happen from the get-go, so you're not incredibly emotionally invested in things. I will say that the movie has one thing going for it, however, and it's perhaps the most important aspect. It seems to be aimed toward the old school Sandler fans who remember his audio skits and the humor that resided in them. The whole thing could be seen as a visual version of something from an old Sandler CD, and yes, it definitely includes a third version of his famous Hanukkah song. At the end of the day, it all depends on personal taste. Being an old fan of his old material, I don't HATE this movie, but it seems to get worse with time and, quite frankly, maturity. Still though, it's not totally without it's moments, and there are a few genuine laughs that veer away from what is otherwise a standard toilet humor film. What more can I say, it's Sandler, 2002, so just around the time he was starting to get the hate coming in from critics. I'd kinda place this one somewhere in the lower middle for Sandler quality. 2/5  I reviewed this one last year as well on my old site, and thought I'd bring it back because of the way I ended up feeling about it. When this first came out, I definitely enjoyed it pretty thoroughly. The animation was great, it had this solid Christmas spirit to it, and it was a fun fantasy adventure. But last year upon seeing it, my opinion of it waned quite a bit. This year, I haven't really changed my mind, either.
First of all, the plot is focused on a kid named... nothing at all, but is credited as "Hero Boy". He's of the age where Christmas is starting to lose it's overall magic. So, on Christmas Eve, he hears an express train right outside his door, runs outside, and a conductor invites him to come to the North Pole. The kid (as every kid should ACTUALLY DO under these circumstances) backs off and decides not to go on the mysterious trip to a ridiculously far off land with a creepy stranger. That lasts a few seconds, and then he jumps on because why not? He meets a few characters, including a girl, a geek, and a little boy, all complete with horrible character flaws (which I'll soon explain). When the conductor comes around to punch the tickets, the girl ends up losing hers, and the kid chases the ticket around the train for half the movie. The other half involves their arrival at the North Pole. Okay, so let's get what's BAD about this movie out of the way. Fair warning, contains spoilers. For starters, all those character flaws. The girl is constantly asked if she's "sure" about certain situations, and in the end she decides she's sure about something. It happens three times in total. I guess we're supposed to feel for her uncertainty about tough decisions, but it's resolved so quickly and easily that its hard to care. There's never any weight to these decisions, and I don't think we ever see why she's like this. Second, the geek. He's just the worst type of annoying. He's this nazal-voiced know-it-all who's all up in everybody's face about how much he knows about stuff. An insufferable little braggart you kinda wanna see the kid punch in the face just once. Lastly, the lonely little boy. He spends most of the movie in the rear car, just sitting there, looking at his boots. When we finally get to him, we realize that he's poor and Christmas doesn't ever work out for him. I guess we're supposed to feel bad for him, but it's hard to get invested when there hasn't been any focus on the character at all. Why do we care about a character we know nothing about other than "he's poor". There's nothing more to him, really. The other thing that really bugs me nowadays are the basic morals taught at the end of the story. Well, some of them, anyway. The one that stands out is that the lonely little boy is told he should "rely on" and "depend on" people... that made me think of the end of that 'Simpsons' episode where Homer tells Marge he can offer her "complete and utter dependence". In the words of Marge, "that's not a good thing." I mean, couldn't it be something more like "communicate"? Okay, okay, I've ripped into it long enough. Let's talk about what was good about it, and how things may have effected it along the way. Well, for starters, the movie is absolutely beautiful to look at. We get vast wilderness landscapes, flying through the air, going on a sort of roller coaster ride on the train tracks, and it's all set against a mysterious looking Christmas Eve night. I haven't seen it in 3D yet, but you can telll that a LOT of stuff really lends itself to the 3D here. The overall animation of the characters for 2004 wasn't quite as standard as it looks now either. Before this, the only movie that really did this kind of animation was probably 'Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within'. Now, it's been seen in quite a bit more, and though it still looks good, it's not nearly as mind-blowing as it was back then. What I DO enjoy about this movie, apart from the beautiful scale of the animation, is that the last, big moral kinda hits home. It can be kinda tough growing up and having all that wonderful Christmas magic taken away from you. But this shows that with the right mind, you can still at least believe in the spirit of Christmas, because it resides in your heart. So, I'd argue that the final scene of the film is well done. This is kind of a tricky one. I'd probably say that if you're looking for a fun experience, and you can make it happen, check your local theater for potential showtimes in 3D. It'd probably be a fun time if you see it like that. The animation totally still holds up anyway. But if you're looking for a story with great, well-rounded characters, you might wanna reconsider and check something else out. 3/5  This title comes from last year's theatrical adaventures. I ended up wanting to revisit it though, as out of everything, it seemed to be the most... Christmassy from what I remember.
A retired auto engineer named Walter (Danny Glover) is a widower who lost his wife one year prior. He calls on his four grown-up children, Rachel (Gabrielle Union), Cheryl (Kimberly Elise), Christian (Romany Malco) and Evan (Jesse Usher) in hopes to have a nice, family Christmas together. However, family dysfunction gets in the way, and may just turn everything into a mess. Despite it being pretty predictable and formulaic, having everything to do with family drama, it's not without some holiday charm and some humorous dialogue. I'd be lying if I said that there wasn't any warmth to it. There's a few scenes in this that make a family Christmas look like a lot of fun, and there's even a few bits that'll tug at your heartstrings. One such example is Walter trying all the way through the film to recreate his wife's wonderful sweet potato pie. That's touching enough, but without spoiling anything, it's the process he eventually gets to that's really quite sweet. It's certainly not the end all be all of family Christmas movies, but it's warm, funny, and touching in small doses. It might not be one to watch with the kids either. Not that it's not family friendly enough, but it's certainly aimed at a more mature audience. Overall, I'd say this film was kinda just bittersweet. When it has heart, it has a lot of heart, and it can make one smile. It's just too bad that so much of that heart is overshadowed by the dark and dysfunctional side of family get-togethers. At first, I figured this was going to be an overall forgettable movie, but I found myself surprisingly wanting to revisit this one of the four major Christmas titles I saw last year for my old site. More than anything, it had to do with the memorable moments Danny Glover makes when he figures out how to make the sweet potato pie. Nothing else last year managed to stand out in such a way, so I'm happy to revisit some of the warmer moments in this. It's just a nice, small Christmas movie for the holidays, but nothing to get hyped about. 3/5  Okay, so... there's a pretty good chance I'm in a solid minority here, but... I like this one a bit more than it's predecessor. It's one I have to turn my back on other critics for as well, with an astonishing low of 27% on Rotten Tomatoes. So, perhaps you're asking what makes it better?
Well, make no mistake. I SEE where this gets a bad rap from. It's essentially a repeat idea of Kevin's (Macaulay Culkin) family screwing up again, and once again rushing for their flight, this time to Florida. This time Kevin is tagging along, but with his dire need to change a tape in a stupid tape recorder, loses track of his family and ends up on the wrong flight to New York City. There, he has run-ins with his old criminal enemies, Harry and Marv (Joe Pesci and Daniel Stern, respectively), but throughout the movie Kevin seems more keen on avoiding them and their trouble. That is until he learns of their plans to rob an orphanage as well as rob Duncan's Toy Chest (which, in reality, is F.A.O. Schwartz Toy Store) blind. This time around, Kevin finds a place for his battleground which happens to be a relative's home, undergoing renovations. So a lot of the traps this time around involve industrial tools and equipment as opposed to household items. Of course, the whole thing DOES essentially end up being the first movie all over again, so I understand where critics are coming from. Even a lot of the gags are repeated. The difference here, and what makes me appreciate it a bit more, are two very specific things. For one, this time around, Kevin isn't on home turf. He's in Manhattan in the early 90's, which was a scary place to be. There's an immediate threat to his very safety based on that idea alone. The other major thing here is that in the first movie, Kevin is defending his home from these guys. Most people would consider the same if it were to happen to them. However, here, Kevin decides to actually be a hero and stop these guys from ruining Christmas for a whole bunch of other kids. I tend to see that as a pretty major, selfless growth for Kevin, considering what a brat he can actually be. On top of all that, I just think this one is funnier over all, where the first one was a bit sweeter. There are several moments here that still make me laugh out loud, mostly involving the brutality of some of the traps Kevin sets this time around. If the first movie was gonna cause injuries if it were more realistic, this one would have probably caused a couple of deaths. But again, "realistic" isn't what we're here for. We're here to watch a live-action cartoon. Otherwise, though, I can admit it's pretty much the same thing with a different look. Kinda like comparing 'A New Hope' to 'The Force Awakens'. I also admit that I probably enjoyed the mysterious old man from the first as compared to the mysterious bird lady in this one. I may vote that this one has better stuff to it, but it's understandable being in the 1% on this one. Really, watching the two back to back is a fun treat and in the end, it's only my opinion that makes this better for me, personally. It's not what I'd say is a better movie than the first though. I know that's very confusing. Try to think of it this way. My favorite movie of all time is 'Ghostbusters', but it's not what I would consider the BEST movie of all time, because I recognize there are titles like 'The Godfather' that could easily outdo it. In other words, in the grand scheme of things, 'Home Alone' is probably a better movie than 'Home Alone 2', but I just enjoy the latter a bit more, for myself. 4/5  This is one of those precious gems from my childhood. I still remember owning the VHS copy of this that came with a poster for Kevin's battle plan. As for the tape itself, I'm pretty confident that my brother and I wore it out, watching it. It was probably mostly me though. I freaking loved this movie back in the day. It was probably the idea that a kid around my age had the sheer cajones and smarts to mess up a couple of criminals trying to rob his household blind. Bear in mind that when this came out, I was still at a stage of my life where I was being babysat. Being left home alone was a very intriguing concept at the time.
Anyway, for those who have somehow managed to avoid it's infinite television appearances over the past few Christmases, this one features Kevin McCallister (Macaulay Culkin). While in a hustle to reach their flight to Paris, France for a Christmas vacation, the family leaves Kevin behind. While they struggle to get back to him after realizing their mistake, Kevin ends up having to defend his house against two bumbling burglars named Harry (Joe Pesci) and Marv (Daniel Stern). How does he do this exactly? By setting up traps that would realistically cause gashes, bruises, broken limbs, burns, and all sorts of fun stuff. However, this is a family movie, so we're not here for "realistic" Truth be told, I still get a kick out of this movie. It's not exactly an annual watch for me, but I'll watch it through, provided it's on. It just doesn't have as much of an impact on me now because A) I'm not a kid, and being left home alone is no longer a big adventurous opportunity, and B) I have no kids of my own, so I can't fully get the parental perspective of the dread of leaving your kid behind. That said, however, a lot of the dialogue and moments are very memorable, and it's a great nostalgic time. It seems to me that if there's a Christmas movie out there that EVERYONE and their mother has seen, it's probably this one. It was actually kind of a big deal when I was a kid. In fact, the combination of this and 'Ninja Turtles' as two of the most popular things to kids of the time was what brought along another childhood product of the early 90s, '3 Ninjas'. Anyway, there seems to be an obvious "Christmas classic" status to this movie, as it's carried through into the next generation quite nicely. It's by no means what I would consider the perfect Christmas movie, but again, there are some great moments here that are both funny and dramatic. Perhaps one may remember the 'Seinfeld' episode where George is caught crying at the end of the movie. Well, it may seem embarrassing, but that's a pretty warranted tear-up considering what goes on. It's just a really fun time for the whole family. Just... don't try this stuff at home, kids. 4/5 |
RSS Feed