Tag Archives: Comedy

Sisters-2015

Sisters-2015

Director Jason Moore

Starring Tina Fey, Amy Poehler

Scott’s Review #458

80063604

Reviewed July 31, 2016

Grade: B-

Slapstick comedy is admittedly not my genre of choice, though I will watch some for light entertainment or to see just how bad (or good) current offerings are.

Nonetheless, I have tried to put myself in a mindset of low expectations for these films that are usually fluff and plot-driven.

In the case of Sisters (2015), the film is pretty much as one would expect: vulgar, crass and raunchy. Yet, due to the chemistry between the leads (Amy Poehler and Tina Fey) and a few heartfelt romantic moments, something does work. It is not as mean as one might think.

This is not to say that Sisters is a great film. Hardly. But not as bad as I feared.

Poehler and Fey play Maura and Kate Ellis, respectively, two late thirties sisters, living in other areas of the country, who return home to Orlando, Florida, when their parents (James Brolin and Dianne Wiest) sell their childhood home.

Maura and Kate have been tasked with cleaning their bedrooms in time for the sale.

The sisters have an idea to throw one final bash and invite their high school classmates, who all conveniently still live in the same town. Events go awry and the party gets way out of hand.

Mixed in with the main plot are sub-plots consisting of a romantic interest for Maura, and a rival for Kate, played by Maya Rudolph.

The best part is the chemistry between Poehler and Fey. They “have it” whether it is a Saturday Night Live sketch, hosting the Golden Globe awards, or starring in Sisters. The banter and the jokes work well because the two comics work well together and it shows on-screen.

They are believable as sisters despite looking nothing alike.

Otherwise, Sisters is a traditional vulgar comedy. One irksome recent trend (now more female-driven than in years past) is the leading ladies being classless. This must be an attempt at female empowerment or the assumption that since adult comedies were once a man’s world, female characters should be written like men.

Do we need Kate and Maura swearing like sailors, making poop jokes, and being so raunchy? Behaving like ladies would now be the exception, not the norm (Bridesmaids, 2011, set this precedent).

Not surprisingly, the supporting characters are all caricatures as is typically the case in films of this genre. The parents are a bit clueless and have kinky sex much to the girl’s chagrin.

Brinda, bitchy, judgmental, yet insecure, the Korean (big stereotype) nail technician who cannot properly pronounce English words, the new owners of the house are snobbish, uptight, and clueless, and finally, James, the guy next door, who are Mr. Fix-it and the straight man in the high-jinks. He is sugar-sweet and the male hero.

The romantic scenes between Maura and James are sweet and sentimental, nicely balancing the vulgarity and raunchiness that the rest of the film encompasses. They are a nice couple and have a rich rooting value.

Most of the action takes place at Kate and Maura’s childhood home where posters of such 1980s films as E.T. and Out of Africa, and a poster of heartthrob Tom Cruise, hang on the walls.

This, and many other references that Generation X will delight from in this film are pointed out, so that is a treat and a positive of the film.

As the party gets off to a slow start, the thirty and forty-somethings appear dull and either talk about their kids or their various maladies and suddenly, after being fed drugs, are back to their college party days, are both dumb and cute at the same time.

Sisters (2015) (hopefully) knows what it is. It is a late Saturday night, raunchy comedy affair, meant as fluff and escapist fun. It is not a masterpiece nor does it intend to be one.

Rather, a full-length SNL sketch including many alumni. It is harmless fun.

Frankenweenie-2012

Frankenweenie-2012

Director Tim Burton

Starring Catherine O’Hara, Martin Short

Scott’s Review #454

70219496

Reviewed July 23, 2016

Grade: B

Frankenweenie is a very creative Tim Burton-made, stop-motion film that received a nomination for Best Animated Feature at the 2012 Oscars.

On the dark side, it is a pleasure to watch for the thought-invoked and left-of-center approach as compared to many safe modern animated features.

The story revolves around a lonely young man who experiments on his recently deceased dog to bring him back to life.

It is a black and white film, has nice horror references (Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein) and interesting characters.

It is also heartwarming as the child’s love for the dog is evident.

The movie is easy to compare to 2012’s ParaNorman in multiple ways (lonely male teen, both dark films).

As much as I give major props to this film for the creativity involved, somehow it did not completely connect with me (I liked ParaNorman better) and I’m not sure why, but I have great respect for the creative achievements it encompasses.

Oscar Nominations: Best Animated Feature Film

ParaNorman-2012

ParaNorman-2012

Director Chris Butler, Sam Fell

Starring Kodi Smit-McPhee, Anna Kendrick

Scott’s Review #453

70217914

Reviewed July 23, 2016

Grade: B+

ParaNorman (2012) is a highly imaginative and very enjoyable, animated film that I admired a great deal.

Creative colors and images are key and the film is stop-motion.

Despite being animated it is not a kid’s movie but rather geared toward the teenager or older demographic.

It is among the strongest, along with Frankenweenie, a similar type film, of the five nominated films for Best Animated feature, in the year 2012.

ParaNorman is so similar to Frankenweenie that they could almost be simultaneously reviewed or watched on the same day.  Both center around an isolated young male coping with his surroundings and both contain a light horror feel to them.

In ParaNorman, an army of zombies invades a small, suburban town, and our hero, Norman, a strange young man who can communicate with the dead, must save the day.

The film contains sympathetic peers, but the adults in the film present various obstacles.

I have gone on record as being not much of an animated film fan, but I do view the best of each year and this one impressed me immensely.

Oscar Nominations: Best Animated Feature Film

Ruby Sparks-2012

Ruby Sparks-2012

Director Jonathan Dayton, Valerie Faris

Starring Paul Dano, Zoe Kazan

Scott’s Review #442

70213510

Reviewed July 4, 2016

Grade: B

Ruby Sparks is a smart, creative, indie film released in 2012.

The film’s theme is fantasy versus reality as the main character is a troubled writer who envisions a character he has created is real.

Is she real or isn’t she?

The film centers around a writer (Paul Dano) with writer’s block who creates an imaginary dream girl (Zoe Kazan), who magically comes to life, one day.

This is an interesting premise and the film has some big-named actors (Annette Bening, Eliot Gould, Antonio Banderas) in small roles which is a delight to see.

The chemistry is lacking between the two leads and the film delves too much into a typical romantic comedy.

Additionally, the film never explains if it is going for seriousness or purely the writer’s imagination, but I admire its creativity and thoughtful premise.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Screenplay

Gayby-2012

Gayby-2012

Director Jonathan Lisecki

Starring Jenn Harris, Mathew Wilkas

Scott’s Review #441

70234883

Reviewed July 3, 2016

Grade: C+

Gayby (2012) is a sketch-type comedy about two best friends (a gay man and a straight woman) who decide to have a child together.

Both have reached a certain age and are unhappy to have not found the perfect mate. The story is not novel and feels more like a Saturday Night Live sketch than a film.

The film is also playing on the success of television comedies like NBC’s Will and Grace, the obvious dynamic of the central characters.

The two leads are quite appealing in a comic way, have wit (Jenn Harris is deliciously neurotic), and have great timing.

The subject matter is interesting, though as years go by and more LGBTQ+ topics are covered,  it is becoming rather dated and not novel anymore.

The negative is the frenetic, quick pacing of the film, ultimately making it rather off-putting and annoying, to say nothing of the irritating stereotypical, supporting characters.

They are written so over-the-top that it is tough to take the film as seriously as it should be taken.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best First Screenplay

Safety Not Guaranteed-2012

Safety Not Guaranteed-2012

Director Colin Trevorrow

Starring Mark Duplass, Aubrey Plaza

Scott’s Review #440

70227946

Reviewed July 3, 2016

Grade: B-

Safety Not Guaranteed is similar in style to another 2012 independent film, Ruby Sparks, in that they pose the question of “Is this fantasy or reality”?

The film deals with the subject matter of time travel.

The story centers around a magazine journalist, who, along with two interns, follows a man convinced that he is building a time travel machine.

The story then develops into a romantic comedy of sorts and the audience is unsure if the guy is crazy or purely a genius.

It’s an interesting concept, intelligently written, and Aubrey Plaza and Mark Duplass are both quite likable in the lead roles.

The one flaw for me was, at times, the movie dove into slapstick territory with a silly secondary story of a stereotypically written Indian character attempting to lose his virginity.

Besides that, Safety Not Guaranteed (2012) has intriguing intentions.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best First Screenplay (won), Best First Feature

Hope Springs-2012

Hope Springs-2012

Director David Frankel

Starring Meryl Streep, Tommy Lee Jones

Scott’s Review #434

70230548

Reviewed June 30, 2016

Grade: B

Hope Springs (2012) is a cute, lighthearted romantic comedy-drama with enormous talent (it is tough to go wrong with heavyweights like Meryl Streep and Tommy Lee Jones).

The story tells of a middle-aged, married couple who reach the point of boredom in their long marriage. They decide to go away on a retreat to repair their marriage and add some spark.

That’s the movie in a nutshell.

There are no surprises to speak of and I expected a bit more from this film given the talent involved. It has safely written all over it, and while nice, it could have been much more.

What’s the reason for the conflict? They suddenly reach a point of boredom for no reason.

Props to Steve Carell for an against-type performance.

Hope Springs (2012) has great acting all around, but too safe of a story.

Dirty Grandpa-2016

Dirty Grandpa-2016

Director Dan Mazer

Starring Robert De Niro, Zac Efron

Scott’s Review #432

80049285

Reviewed June 29, 2016

Grade: D-

It’s a sad day when the only interesting aspect of a film is the gratuitous nudity of one of its stars, but that is precisely the case with Dirty Grandpa (2016).

Zac Efron bravely bares all for the sake of art….or a big paycheck, whichever the case may be.

Otherwise, Dirty Grandpa is complete drivel.

It is crass, rude, mean-spirited, and blatant in its raunch. It also aspires (successfully) to be politically incorrect, quite surprising in these times of fairness and equality for all.

If the film intends to be outrageous, it succeeds in spades.

Unfortunately, there is not much comedy, and the film is quite bad, even where dumb comedies are concerned.

Starring one of the film’s most extraordinary talents of all time, Robert DeNiro, one wonders why he would sign on to appear in this film. Perhaps it has to do with playing a role he has yet to do. We will probably never know unless we ask him.

DeNiro plays Dick Kelly, a retired Army veteran, recently widowed after forty years of marriage. Faithful for decades, he embarks on a road trip to Daytona Beach, Florida, with his grandson, Jason (Efron).

Dick’s goal is to conquer a slutty college girl he and Jason meet while they are eating at a roadside diner.

Lenore (Aubrey Plaza) is a college girl with her friend Shadia (Zoey Deutch). Shadia knows Jason from school. To complicate matters, Jason is engaged to self-absorbed Meredith. This sets off a chain of circumstances in which each pair falls in love while arguing various trivial issues.

Thrown in are scenes of partying, acting silly, and outrageous crude remarks and behavior. The standard bathroom humor is not spared.

Dirty Grandpa’s subject matter is not uncharted territory; the “road trip/buddy movie” has been done many times in film history.

My gripe is not so much with the film’s raunchiness, but it is not funny. Over the top in raunch comedy, it has worked many times- think Pink Flamingos (1972) and other John Waters films.

But those films had characters to root for and who were interesting.

DeNiro’s character is the pits; Efron’s not so bad. The motivation of Dick Kelly is to have sex- almost like the guys in American Pie (1999), but with them, it was cute.

DeNiro plays a man in his 70s.

That is fine, but he is so blunt about his need for sex and whines about not having sex for fifteen years because of his wife’s cancer. So, the audience is to think of him as a nice guy because he waits for his wife to die to score on spring break.

Lame.

Efron is my favorite character. As mentioned above, he has a lot of skin, which is the most appealing aspect of this sorry film.

The chemistry between Efron and DeNiro is not terrible, and I bought them as a grandfather and grandson.

Efron is unafraid to poke fun at his beefcake image and deserves praise. He has a fantastic, chiseled body, and showing it off is good for him.

Efron has the talent. Does anyone recall The Paperboy (2012)? He was superlative in that underrated independent gem. In Dirty Grandpa, he plays the straight man and is the only “normal” character.

He is the voice of reason, if you will.

The supporting characters are as stereotypical as possible.

It is almost as if the film intends to offend but with no good reason. Dirty Grandpa has the dumb jocks, the horny teen girl, the weak, effeminate gay character, the Hispanic drug dealer, and so forth.

Danny Glover’s brief cameo appearance as a horny wheelchair-bound nursing home resident (and old buddy of Dick) is as much laughable (not in a good way) as forgettable.

Most characters are thinly written.

Dirty Grandpa (2016) appeals to unsophisticated moviegoers who find crude, mean-spirited characters funny and deem stock characters acceptable. Every other sensible person will dislike this film.

Ted-2012

Ted-2012

Director Seth MacFarlane

Starring Mark Wahlberg, Mila Kunis

Scott’s Review #428

70218756

Reviewed June 21, 2016

Grade: D-

So many times I will watch a comedy deemed “the funniest movie of the year”, or some other touting, and be disappointed in it.

This is the case with Ted (2012).

To be fair to the creators, I did enjoy the 1980s references, and the teddy bear has a charming, gruff, witty, crude personality that was funny at times, but that’s it for the positives.

The main storyline (a loyal male slacker with a successful girlfriend) has been done to death and this was one of the most predictable, sappy movie endings I’ve ever seen so I don’t get why people think it is so great.

Think happily ever after, as if the result was ever in question.

Ted was filled with stereotypical characters, specifically Asian stereotypes, and a myriad of dumb situations.

The actors could handle stronger material.

Raunchy comedies need not have a surprise ending, but the sappy love story was too lame to take at times. At least the film should have taken some risks and given an edge to it.

And the lord helps us if there is an inevitable sequel to Ted (2012).

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Song-“Everybody Needs a Best Friend”

That’s My Boy-2012

That’s My Boy-2012

Director Sean Anders

Starring Adam Sandler, Andy Samberg

Scott’s Review #423

70220030

Reviewed June 19, 2016

Grade: D

That’s My Boy (2012) is such an incredibly bad film yet there is something that strangely kept my attention.

With oodles of stereotypes and either sexist, homophobic, or racist jokes throughout the film, it should have made me angry, but somehow it did not.

This movie was so completely over the top that it could not possibly be taken too seriously.

One laughable aspect that I did enjoy was the, albeit odd, cameos by Vanilla Ice and Todd Bridges who seem to have no problem degrading themselves, and the references to the 1980s.

Otherwise, That’s My Boy is pretty rock bottom for filmmaking.

This is not a knock on the dumb comedy genre as other recent similar types of films are well written (like This is 40-2011).

But, alas, That’s My Boy (2012) is not one of those films and will not go down in history as such.

True to form, the ending was predictable and uninteresting.

Seven Psychopaths-2012

Seven Psychopaths-2012

Director Martin McDonagh

Starring Colin Farrell, Sam Rockwell

Scott’s Review #422

70241756

Reviewed June 19, 2016

Grade: B-

Seven Psychopaths (2012) is a film that I truly wanted to like more than I did.

It started well with a Quentin Tarantino style that was appealing and the film does contain an interesting premise.

Colin Farrell plays the straight man in a cast of offbeat, quirky characters and is attempting to complete a screenplay entitled “Seven Psychopaths” based on these characters.

Sounds great, but halfway through the movie stopped delivering. I found myself slightly bored.

The film has a unique concept, to be sure, but fizzles during the second act, so much so that it stopped making much sense and lost my interest.

I did admire the creativity, though, and the chemistry among the cast is great, but the overall story in Seven Psychopaths (2012) disappointed me.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Supporting Male-Sam Rockwell, Best Screenplay

Hotel Transylvania-2012

Hotel Transylvania-2012

Director Genndy Tartakovsky

Starring Adam Sandler, Kevin James

Scott’s Review #418

70220028

Reviewed June 18, 2016

Grade: C-

Hotel Transylvania is a 2012 animated comedy film about an overprotective Dracula with a teenage daughter fascinated with the human world.

The premise sounded interesting to me- a gothic, spooky feature and the animations are very well done- bright, colorful, and unique, but the plot is way too predictable and the story as safe as they come.

Despite the dark mood of the film, there is nothing remotely scary about Dracula or any of the other characters. Rather they are completely cliched and quite amateurish.

The target audience is age 10 and under and parents might find themselves bored. I am not a parent and I was bored to tears at one point.

It is too cutesy for my tastes.

Save for the impressive animations, Hotel Transylvania (2012) is completely mainstream fare and forgettable filmmaking.

A great story achieves mountains and this one lacks.

Robot & Frank-2012

Robot & Frank-2012

Director Jake Schreier

Starring Frank Langella, Susan Sarandon

Scott’s Review #414

70227654

Reviewed June 18, 2016

Grade: C

Robot & Frank (2012) is one of those films where I am left with a “meh” reaction after having viewed it.

It’s not that it’s a bad movie, but there’s nothing particularly special either- it is quite ordinary and rather forgettable after the credits have rolled.

The premise, on paper,  seems novel: a future with robots that grow attached to humans. Unfortunately, the movie did not live up to the idea.

I was hoping for an interesting 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) type robot idea (HAL) but received nothing of the kind.

I’m a big fan of Frank Langella and I felt he was the main attraction in this movie.

On a side note, why is Susan Sarandon suddenly playing every meaningless supporting role these days? Another wasted role. She deserves better.

Several plot points had no follow-through and the ending, while not exactly predictable, was nothing spectacular.

Meh.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best First Screenplay

Behind The Candelabra-2013

Behind the Candelabra-2013

Director Steven Soderbergh

Starring Michael Douglas, Matt Damon

Scott’s Review #411

70274808

Reviewed June 18, 2016

Grade: A

I thoroughly enjoyed this HBO film based on the life of Liberace, whom I was too young to know much about before viewing this movie.

The excesses of his lavish lifestyle are explored completely.

The standouts are Michael Douglas and Matt Damon who are both exceptional in their portrayals of Liberace and his young lover. Both were unrecognizable at times and completely embodied their characters.

I can’t attest to the absolute truth of the story, but the HBO film does a nice job of mixing joy, passion, heartbreak, sadness, and competition throughout.

The story undoubtedly bears a likeness to many Hollywood troubled relationships past and present.

Bus Stop-1956

Bus Stop-1956

Director Joshua Logan

Starring Marilyn Monroe, Don Murray

Scott’s Review #400

60004539

Reviewed April 30, 2016

Grade: C

Bus Stop is a 1956 film starring Marilyn Monroe that, while surprisingly ranking as one of her best roles, is one of her worst films in my opinion and, at present times, feels dated, chauvinistic, and diminishing to women.

Perhaps perceived as romantic and cute in 1956, times have changed, and the film no longer has the charm it undoubtedly must have had decades ago.

The film is based on a play by William Inge and, remarkably, is Monroe’s first full-fledged dramatic performance. She plays a nightclub performer named Cherie or mispronounced “cherry” by her love interest, Beau, an immature, naïve, socially inept cowboy, unfamiliar with women, and looking for his “angel”.

He is accompanied by his friend and father figure, Virgil.

Together, they travel by bus for a rodeo from Montana to Phoenix, Arizona. Once Beau meets Cherie, he conquers and marries her despite her resistance to his pursuits.

As a fan of Monroe’s more familiar works- Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953) and How To Marry A Millionaire (1953), it is nice to see her in a dramatic role, giving her some nice range and meatier material to tackle.

In 1956, she still looked marvelous, and the sexy nightclub outfit she wore while prancing around in the film worked well.

While Monroe will never be accused of being the most excellent actress in the world, her performance in this film is to be praised. She expresses some lovely emotions. Unfortunately, the character is poorly written, but Monroe gives it the old college try.

Another positive aspect of the film is that of the supporting cast.

Bus stop owner Grace (Betty Field), who has a suggested affair with the bus driver (Robert Bray), is a delight and nearly steals the show! I found their limited screen time and limited romance more interesting and fraught with more potential than the main couple (Beau and Cherie).

Eileen Heckert is acceptable as Vera, Cherie’s waitress and confidante, though she is given little to do.

My favorite scene is at Grace’s Bus Stop as the group is stranded during a sudden winter storm. Beau and the bus driver engage in a bare-knuckles fight outdoors in the driving snow while the rest look on. The bus driver is tired of Beau’s obnoxiousness and intends to teach him a lesson.

Despite being on a sound stage, the scene is authentic, and the snow and gusts add to the animal-like, masculine scene.

Otherwise, the film is not kind to women and, in some parts, is downright sexist. When Cherie, clearly rebuffing Beau’s advances, attempts to board a bus out of town (and alone), Beau decides to lasso her to prevent her from leaving.

In the next scene, Cherie obediently sits beside Beau on another bus to Phoenix to marry him.  It is suggested that she finally gives in, temporarily, to his advances.

This film would never be made today.

The character of Beau is not well crafted. Dumb, lower class, and bordering on abusive to Cherie, I am perplexed as to why the audience should root for this character to obtain Cherie and ride off happily into the sunset- I certainly did not.

I would have preferred a pairing of Cherie and Virgil, who are older, sensible, and kind.

Dated, sexist, and poorly written characters, Bus Stop (1956) is not Monroe’s best film, but it allows an audience to see her in a dramatic role that is worth a viewing.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actor-Don Murray

Hello, My Name Is Doris-2016

Hello, My Name Is Doris-2016

Director Michael Showalter

Starring Sally Field, Max Greenfield

Scott’s Review #390

80050896

Reviewed April 1, 2016

Grade: B

Sally Field shines in Hello, My Name Is Doris (2016), a sweet-natured indie romantic comedy that tells of a lonely Staten Island woman and her mostly fantasy-laden relationship with her colleague, a much younger, hunky man (Max Greenfield).

The film is somewhat predictable but sweet and honest and works well. It hardly reinvents the wheel, but it is a lovely character-oriented story about a woman’s reawakening from a dull life.

This is refreshing in a world of retreads and superhero flicks.

Doris Miller meanders through life at her crappy data entry job at an Advertising Agency in mid-town Manhattan. Having worked in the same role for decades, she is overlooked and more or less invisible to colleagues.

She is the “weird old lady” or the “wallflower” who goes unnoticed. Her personal life is a dud. She lives with her recently deceased mother, who is a hoarder and severely marginalized. She has no dating possibilities.

One day, on the elevator heading to the office, a kind young man named John Fremont innocently pays attention to her, and she becomes enamored with him.

Later, she is stunned to realize that John is the new Art Director at her job.

Her crush escalates as she and John become friends, and a series of misunderstandings ensue, with the added conflict of her friends thinking she is living in a fantasy world, worried she will wind up hurt.

Sally Field carries this film in every way. It is nice to see her in a lead role again, which, sadly, is a rarity these days for a seventy-year-old actress.

She convincingly plays quirky, shy, and awkward and has one melt-down scene that is a powerful testament to her continued acting ability.

The character of Doris slowly blossoms and becomes rich with zest. We discover she is much more than meets the eye, and these moments in the film are wonderful to experience, thanks to Field’s charisma.

My favorite scenes involve the lovely bond between Doris and the thirteen-year-old granddaughter of her best pal, Roz, played by Tyne Daly.

Despite the age difference, the granddaughter views her as a peer, giving daring dating advice to the inept Doris. This leads to a nice portion of the plot and some funny moments.

One unique aspect of Hello, My Name Is Doris is that it is not a film about a May-December romance between a man and a woman—at least, I did not see it that way. Instead, it is about a woman who finally decides to live regardless of age.

I felt her stifled and smothered by her brother and sister-in-law, who clearly did not understand that she hoarded “stuff” in her home to cope with her loneliness, and to be surrounded by things that gave her comfort helped her deal.

Granted, Doris clinging to one broken wooden ski from the Dark Ages was amusing in its cuteness.

Tyne Daly, who can recite the phone book, is worth a considerable note from an acting standpoint. I’d be happy to do that. She is one of those natural, confident, engaging, real actresses, and her scenes with Field glistened with raw talent and emotion.

Perhaps a female buddy movie with Field and Daly?

The remainder of the supporting characters are capable but not spectacular. They are somewhat clichéd and one-note.

For example, Doris’s colleagues view her as invisible with the classic office jokes, especially the female boss thrown into the film- possessing a hard-as-nails personality and coldness.

I have seen these characters time after time in comedy films.

Supporting actors from Orange is the New Black (2013-2019) and Mad Men (2007-2015) are featured as a couple of the colleagues.

Indie, fun, and with a freshness made in large part by Sally Field, Hello, My Name Is Doris (2016) is an innocent comedy with a romantic edge and some nice laughs.

It is far from a masterpiece but a good-natured escape, which is refreshing, especially for the middle-aged or senior crowd craving a non-stereotypical female character.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Piaget Producers Award (won)

Obvious Child-2014

Obvious Child-2014

Director Gillian Robespierre

Starring Jenny Slate

Scott’s Review #387

70301275

Reviewed March 22, 2016

Grade: C+

Obvious Child is a 2014 independent comedy/drama nominated for a couple of independent spirit awards, that has mixed results.

It works on some levels but has an irritating underbelly and some unneeded components that ultimately give it a thumbs down.

The major success is star Jenny Slate, a real-life Brooklyn stand-up comic with immeasurable comic timing, who will hopefully become a rising star.

Slate starred in a 2009 short film of the same name before said film graduated to a full-length feature.

Slate stars as a twenty-eight-year-old Brooklyn-ite, who moonlights as a stand-up comic in a dingy bar while working in a desolate bookstore that is soon closing.

Conversely, her parents are successful- her mother is a famed professor. When she is unceremoniously dumped by her steady, she takes up with a handsome young man for a one-night stand filled with fun.

Predictably, she winds up pregnant and forges ahead with a plan to abort their child.

The abortion story is quite interesting since there is never a doubt about what will happen. Unlike films that make abortion the main focus of conflict, Obvious Child wisely does not- every character supports, and even encourages her to have the procedure, including her mother and best friend.

Having been written and directed by women, this is intentional and a way of empowering women, which is one of the high points. If one is on the fence about the topic of abortion or is a pro-life stance, this film may be very tough to watch as its slant is made crystal clear.

Slate is the other high point of the film.

She exudes confidence and comic range. Jewish and slightly awkward looking, she is not the leading-lady type and this arguably makes her wit and sarcastic language all the more comical. She is a natural in the comedy department and hope she will go far.

Two slight props for me worth mentioning are the wonderful mention of the classic film Gone with the Wind (1939) and the setting of Brooklyn. This was a great nod to film history and the setting gave Obvious Child an authentic New York City feel.

On the other hand, an utter annoyance about Obvious Child is the shameless and constant use of blatant and off-putting bathroom humor- not just once or twice, but numerous times.

How is this necessary to the plot? I can’t say, but surmise that it was deemed necessary by the filmmakers to show that females can give as good as males can.

Almost saying, “men can make poop jokes, why can’t women”? Why this is necessary for any film is beyond me and it gives Obvious Child a crass, ugly feel.

The film also has an unrealistic quality to it. Max is portrayed as prince charming. He can do no wrong, supports Donna in any decision she makes, is enamored by her sole being, and loves her unconditionally after only a one-night stand.

This would not happen in real life.

The fact that Donna is Jewish and quirky and Max is Christian and straight-laced is not explored. What conflicts would they undoubtedly face? Why were his parents not featured?

Highly uneven, with a great premise and an interesting slant on a still-controversial social issue, Obvious Child (2014) succeeds in the story department but fails in its uncalled-for use of potty humor to elicit cheap laughs.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Female Lead-Jenny Slate, Best First Feature

Spy-2015

Spy-2015

Director Paul Feig

Starring Melissa McCarthy, Jason Statham

Scott’s Review #386

80027379

Reviewed March 20, 2016

Grade: C+

Spy is a 2015 comedy spy spoof starring funny lady Melissa McCarthy as a loser desk CIA analyst suddenly thrown into the field and assigned to rescue a missing agent with whom she is also in love.

Carrying the film in every way, McCarthy is funny and adds to an otherwise formulaic, by-numbers, comedy.

As, admittedly, the “action-comedy” genre is not my favorite, I have seen much worse than Spy, and the premise is quite nice, but the second half of the film sinks into the ridiculous and is very loud and overly long.

McCarthy plays Susan Cooper, a frumpy forty-year-old woman with a decent job as a CIA analyst (she tracks the field agents’ cameras and warns them of impending peril), an important job, but is deemed dispensable and a loser by the higher-ups at her job, with more important duties.

She is single, overweight, and lonely, pining after her sophisticated partner Bradley Fine (Jude Law), a field agent and stylish James Bond-type.  After a mishap with Bradley thought dead, Susan goes undercover in France, Rome, and Budapest to solve the case since she will be unnoticed.

Spy is a film with a star that completely carries the film.  Being a big fan of McCarthy’s and enjoying her performance in whatever she appears in (comedy or drama), this film needs her charisma and comic timing.

Spy contains a few laugh-out-loud moments, especially when McCarthy is forced to take on the persona of one loser after another- a divorcee with multiple cats and a wardrobe to cringe over-throw in a 1980s perm and got a great SNL-type moment.

The film itself reminds me of a long SNL skit. When McCarthy delivers her one-liners they connect and amuse.

An apparent homage to spy films and James Bond films, Spy seems closer to an Austin Powers film as it goes for more silliness, but not quite as over the top.

Still, the European locales offered added elements of Bond films pleasantly. McCarthy as an apparent female James Bond is also cute.

A noticeable negative is the unnecessary two-hour running time. With a genre of this nature, a ninety to one-hundred-minute running time is all that is necessary, and any more than that the jokes wane, become redundant, and usually go into the ridiculous.

Another problem with Spy is the supporting characters. A well-known cast including Rose Byrne, Allison Janney, Jason Statham,  and Bobby Cannavale, each of these actors are cast in cartoon-like, one-note roles.

Cannavale and Byrne are the villains (Sergio and Rayna) in the plot and they play their roles in a one-dimensional way,  as evil as possible, but perhaps also over-acting the parts.

This could be the fault of the director or simply what is accepted in the genre that this is. Janney-  as the tough-as-nails CIA director and Statham as the dumb, temperamental, field agent also overplay their roles.

Why are all of these characters loud, unpleasant, insulting, or all of the above? The answer is it might allow better comedy to have caricatures instead of characters, but that is a debate for another time.

On the other hand, Miranda Hart as McCarthy’s sidekick Nancy, a very tall, awkward woman, and Susan’s best friend is great and shares equally in the comic success that McCarthy brings.

Their chemistry is evident and a recommended second pairing would be worth exploring. Unlike the other characters, I felt myself rooting for her and wished her a love interest, though the 50 Cent’s romantic introduction was strange.

The plot is more or less trivial and unimportant in a film like this. Rationally speaking, almost everything that transpires would never happen in real life, but alas, this is the movie, so one must suspend disbelief big time.

Spy is escapist fare to the max.

A hot mess if not for the wit and comic timing that McCarthy brings, Spy (2015) has an interesting premise but doesn’t deliver anything more than the silly formula that has existed for decades in the film comedy world.

I finished the film with mixed emotions.

How to Marry a Millionaire-1953

How to Marry a Millionaire-1953

Director Jean Negulesco

Starring Lauren Bacall, Marilyn Monroe, Betty Grable

Scott’s Review #381

60004541

Reviewed February 28, 2016

Grade: B

How to Marry a Millionaire (1953) is a light-hearted, fun, romantic comedy featuring three famous leading ladies: Lauren Bacall, Betty Grable, and the legendary Marilyn Monroe.

The film’s backdrop is warm, sophisticated, and pleasing: 1950s New York City. This setting is appropriate, as all three women featured are models searching for wealthy suitors.

Schatze (Bacall), Loco (Grable), and Pola (Monroe) are blatant gold-diggers. They are set on using their looks and charms to seduce wealthy men into marriage. They rent an enormous and lavish apartment (the owner is out of the country and avoiding the IRS) and slowly sell the furniture to pay the rent.

Each woman encounters potential beaus, rich and poor, and must choose between true love and marriage for money. Or can they achieve both?

I noticed similarities to the 1980s television sitcom The Golden Girls. The ladies on The Golden Girls constantly pursued men—albeit not always rich men. Schatze resembles Dorothy in her directness, leadership skills, and height.

Loco has qualities attributed to Blanche, such as sexiness and a flirty manner. Finally, Pola is dizzy and blonde, a close match for Rose. Unquestionably, How to Marry a Millionaire influenced the iconic television series.

How wonderful the setting is. Interspersed throughout the film are shots of Manhattan, not to mention the visible New York City skyline from the lady’s luxurious apartment where men come and go in attempts to pursue the eligible women.

The city skyline is a set. However, other locales are not.

Numerous cinematic shots include the Empire State Building, Central Park, the Brooklyn Bridge, the lights of Times Square, Rockefeller Center, and the United Nations Building.

As a lover of New York City, it struck me as both fantastic and melancholy to think about how many people have come and gone throughout the iconic city, yet here it remains and always will. A slice of 1950’s Manhattan- another time entirely- was terrific.

The film itself is arguably fluff—lightweight, to be sure. But How to Marry a Millionaire has a 1950s innocence and a sense of fun that has become tainted and is missing in today’s romantic comedy genre. Everything is now so crude and cynical, which is why this film works for me. There is a wholesomeness to it.

Sure, the women are manipulative (specifically  Schatze), but they yearn for true love and are kind women. Their escapades are humorous. Pola- frightened of being seen by a man wearing her glasses- and blind as a bat without them- constantly bumps into walls and navigates rooms by feeling her way around.

More humorous still is when she mistakes a flight to Atlantic City for Kansas City, thereby changing the course of her life.

Loco (Grable), clearly the oldest of the three, and, by this time, Grable was looking flat out matronly, decides to go on a trip to Maine with her married beau, expecting to attend a convention filled with rich and eligible men.

Misunderstanding the situation, she engages in hilarious hijinks with her beau and meets dashing but poor Eban.

Light, fun, with bright colors and sets, How to Marry a Millionaire (1953), when watched now, brings me back to a more pure day when films were innocent and fresh- filled with glamour and sophistication.

A trip down memory lane in the film is a nice thing.

Oscar Nominations: Best Costume Design, Color

Hail, Caesar!-2016

Hail, Caesar! -2016

Director Ethan Coen, Joel Coen

Starring George Clooney, Channing Tatum

Scott’s Review #377

80074084

Reviewed February 16, 2016

Grade: B+

Hail, Caesar! (2016) is a quirky film created and directed by the Coen Brothers, who are known for offbeat films such as Fargo (1996), No Country for Old Men (2007), and Raising Arizona (1987).

Hail, Caesar is a satirical comedy about the Hollywood film industry during the post-World War II period of the 1950s.

The film features a bevy of current Hollywood talent, including George Clooney, Channing Tatum, Josh Brolin, and Scarlett Johannsen, including singing, dancing, and scandalous matters.

All give fine performances and add humor and wit to the film.

The plot centers on the character of Eddie Mannix (Brolin), a celebrity “fixer” and real-life person who works as an executive for Capitol Pictures and whose primary responsibility is to ensure that famous Hollywood stars remain out of trouble.

The period is 1951, a particularly scandalous time in pictures. One of the biggest stars of the time, Baird Whitlock (Clooney), is suddenly kidnapped and held for ransom while completing a big epic film for the studio.

Mannix must race to keep the crisis out of the news and safely get Whitlock back.

Indeed, there are interesting subplots, including handsome yet talent-less Western actor Hobie Doyle, hired by the studio to appear in a sweeping period piece directed by suave Laurence Laurentz (Ralph Fiennes), and DeeAnna Moran (Johannsen), unmarried and with a “bun in the oven,” determined to keep herself out of the tabloids.

I loved the look of the film, as numerous films occur within it. The 1950s set pieces and designs are exquisite, particularly the period piece set, lavishly designed with classic doors, a staircase, flowers, and a cast dressed to the nines.

It brings back an extravagant time.

The film is a satire, to be sure. Still, it also addresses the serious subject of communism (especially for that period), Russia, and Russian defectors, all involved in a plot to prove a valuable point.

Despite the film being a comedy, this is worth serious consideration. Many Hollywood writers make money for the studios and are rewarded with underwhelming salaries.

The same holds true in Hollywood today.

This point can spill over into other walks of life as well, and the point of the “little man gets screwed” is explored. Communism is also explored throughout the film as the central message- an important message that resonates.

Another interesting tidbit that Hail, Caesar!Mentionss, though only on the surface, is the burgeoning onslaught of television programming.

Suddenly, an increasing number of people were purchasing TVs and avoiding the glamour of films, opting instead for the comfort of their couches.

What a different time it was!

An intriguing, favorite character of mine belongs to Channing Tatum’s portrayal of Burt Gurney, a Gene Kelly-like character famous for singing and dancing numbers. A sizzling sailor dance gives edge and sexuality to the film.

A revealing scandal involving Burt and Laurence is fantastic and delicious.

My favorite scene belongs to Frances McDormand, who shamefully only appears in one scene- quite memorable. As film editor C.C. Calhoun, she diligently shows Mannix film dailies in the hopes of discovering a clue in the disappearance of Whitlock. When her scarf gets caught in the projector, hilarity and grotesqueness ensue.

It is a classic Coen Brothers comedy.

Hail Caesar! (2016) succeeds as a witty, comical throwback to a wonderful time in film history, with a political edge that historians will appreciate and Coen Brothers fans will relish.

Perhaps not their most creative or memorable, but enjoyable all the same.

Oscar Nominations: Best Production Design

The Big Short-2015

The Big Short-2015

Director Adam McKay

Starring Christian Bale, Steve Carell

Scott’s Review #369

80075560

Reviewed January 10, 2016

Grade: A-

The Big Short (2015) is a confusing film and is its intention and also its genius.

Throughout some of the film, I was uncertain how much I liked it (or got it) and found many of the characters unlikeable, but at the conclusion, I realized that is exactly what the filmmakers intended is a clever tactic and makes The Big Short a success.

On the surface, the film has some humor but a very dark story at its core and left me a bit depressed and terrified at the conclusion.

I am happy that the film is receiving accolades and is the “thinking man’s” hit movie of the season.

To attempt to summarize the film, the film begins in 2005, approximately two years before the financial crisis of 2007-2008.

Eccentric hedge fund manager Michael Burry (Christian Bale), realizes the U.S. housing market is unstable and predicts a crash.

He attempts to profit by betting against the market, a move laughable to all around him, especially the banks who anticipate a windfall at Michael’s expense. Trader and fellow market managers, Jared Vennett and Mark Baum (played by Ryan Gosling and Steve Carrell) catch wind of Michael’s theory and try to get in on the action.

There is a sub-plot involving two younger investors also attempting to profit through the guidance of a retired banker (played by Brad Pitt).

The financial collapse is a tender subject and certainly no laughing matter, especially since it is so recent and affects many people.

The Big Short is touted as a comedy, which is strange. I found the audience didn’t know exactly what to laugh at or when. The film’s “laughs” were cynical, witty, and sometimes wicked. Many people do not get this type of humor.

In real life, people were kicked out of their homes and lost their jobs, pensions, etc. and it was all the result of greed, which The Big Short hammers home.

Several scenes include frat-boy investor/trader types getting rich by enabling almost anyone to afford a new house. Little did these people realize that there was a catch.

The film paints a jaded picture of Wall Street. The rich get richer at the expense of the middle class and the poor. It is an age-old sad tale.

Performance-wise, Carrell and Bale are the standouts. They both play characters who are damaged. Bale’s Michael is socially awkward, and has a false eye, but is also a genius. Carrell’s Mark is angry, grizzled, and is in therapy as a result of his brother’s suicide.

Both actors are great and have developed into worthy, credible acting talents. Worth mentioning, are small, but meaningful roles by Melissa Leo and Marisa Tomei.

The Big Short is shot interestingly, and highly unusual. From time to time, the action will stop and a famed celebrity (Selena Gomez, a world-renowned chef, or a model in a bubble bath) will explain the events, thus far, or give some review.

Also, more than once the actors will turn to the camera and speak directly to the audience. A personal touch that I found effective.

In the end, not much in life has changed, which is the message, and a frightening one. As one character brilliantly puts it “people will go back to blaming the poor and the immigrants”, which is a sad message.

After millions lost everything, not much has changed in the world and The Big Short makes that very clear. The people responsible have gotten away with crime, the banks bailed out, and a new scheme is undoubtedly in place.

It’s a sad world.

The Big Short (2015) is a gritty, harsh look at reality and a terrific film.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Director-Adam McKay, Best Supporting Actor-Christian Bale, Best Adapted Screenplay (won), Best Film Editing

Caddyshack-1980

Caddyshack-1980

Director Harold Ramis

Starring Chevy Chase, Rodney Dangerfield

Scott’s Review #353

343044

Reviewed January 9, 2016

Grade: A

Caddyshack is one of the funniest slapstick comedies of the 1980s, arguably the decade of “mindless comedy”.

Made in 1980, the cusp of the decade, it led the pack during a time when, one after another, comedy films were churned out in a cookie-cutter style, based largely on the success of Caddyshack.

While not every aspect of the film works, the parts that do are hysterical, and its influence on film history is unquestionable.

More than merely a “dumb comedy”, Caddyshack features funnymen of the day (Bill Murray, Chevy Chase, and Rodney Dangerfield), and the talent and timing are good.

Clean-cut teenager Danny Noonan works as a caddy at a posh resort named Bushwood Country Club. An “underachiever”, he lacks direction in life while being pressured by his parents to attend college.

While spending the summer at work pondering his future, high jinks ensue as a rivalry develops between the club co-founder, Judge Smails (Ted Knight), and the outrageous Al Czervik (Rodney Dangerfield), who is a nouveau riche real estate developer.

Meanwhile, bordering on psychotic, Bill Murray as groundskeeper Carl Spackler is engrossed in his feud with a gopher running rampant on the golf course.

Mixed in with all of this are the standard teen romance themes, bathroom gags, and sexual jokes.

Caddyshack is not high art, nor does it need to, or intend to be. It is simply pure juvenile fun. It is not even that well written, but it works. The portions that work so well do not even involve the caddies who were originally set to be the focal point of the film.

Rather, the real scene-stealers are the two oldest members of the cast- Rodney Dangerfield and Ted Knight. The bickering and barbs traded between the two characters are delicious and downright funny.

When Al mocks Smail’s hat, or dances with his snobbish wife, or crashes into his new boat, each scene is rich with goofy comic timing.

Without a doubt, my favorite scene is the “doody” scene in the resort pool. It is laugh-out-loud raucous, as a candy bar tossed into the water is mistaken for something else.

The star of this scene is Lois Kibbee, who plays Judge Smail’s wife.

Her comic mannerisms and upper-crust looks make her a perfect choice for the role, and she arguably steals the show in her limited appearances.

When Al jokes that she must have been something before electricity, her facial expressions perfectly emit comic horror.

There are points of the film that really are unnecessary and do not work well- I have never understood Bill Murray’s character, Carl. Bordering on silly, with a stuffed animal as the gopher, Murray himself is fantastic- improvising, but the role does not seem necessary to the rest of the film.

More scenes between the Judge and Al, or more from Chevy Chase’s character, Ty, and the Judge’s wife, would have been preferable.

Also, the attempted teen triangle between Danny, Maggie, and Lacey is dullsville- plain Maggie cannot compete with gorgeous and slutty Lacey.

These criticisms, however, are small gripes compared to the hilarity and perfect timing of the rest of the film, which is why it ranks among my favorites.

Caddyshack, along with Animal House, paved the way for the plethora of slapstick comedies to follow- a few good, most bad, but must be recognized as the influence that it was, and a must-see for fans of golf, sports, and good, clean fun.

The elements of Caddyshack (1980) come together and work so well.

The Seven Year Itch-1955

The Seven Year Itch-1955

Director Billy Wilder

Starring Marilyn Monroe, Tom Ewell

Scott’s Review #302

60004542

Reviewed December 18, 2015

Grade: B

Following a string of successful hits by director Billy Wilder (primarily famous for films in the 1940s and 1950s), The Seven Year Itch features Marilyn Monroe in her prime and at her finest.

It is a cute film made charming by the likable legend. While not high art, it is a fun experience in classic romantic comedy cinema, and its innocence is undoubtedly lost in today’s genre.

Playing a familiar character to what she was known for (sexy, flirty, sweet blondes), it is arguably Monroe’s best role (though Some Like it Hot still wins out for me as her best film role).

Richard Sherman, a successful New York publisher, finds himself alone for the summer when his wife and son leave for a vacation in the country. Middle-aged and bored, he immediately is enamored with his gorgeous new upstairs neighbor, known as The Girl, played by Marilyn Monroe.

The Girl is a commercial actress and former model and is quite friendly and bubbly. She is conveniently staying in New York City while filming a new television ad for toothpaste. Richard finds himself awkwardly tempted by the curvaceous Girl in one situation after another.

The Seven Year Itch is pure innocence and fantasy. The Girl has no designs on Richard, and his flirtation with her is harmless and juvenile. Richard is nerdy and socially awkward, not to mention fearful of his wife’s stern nature if she discovers that he is even spending a moment with The Girl.

Much of the film includes scenes where Richard imagines conversations with his wife or imagines her with another man, justifying his attraction for The Girl. These scenes are done hilariously as he imagines conversations with his wife, and his thoughts are exaggerated.

Humorous scenes transpire, such as the “champagne scene,” in which The Girl and Richard attempt to open a champagne bottle while cooling off with Richard’s new state-of-the-art air conditioner.  The Girl keeps her underpants in a freezer to cool off.

The Girl appearing in her toothpaste commercial, comically, is also a treat. And who can forget Marilyn Monroe’s famous scene in which she stands over a subway grate, clad in a sexy white dress and high heels, the wind from the subway blowing her dress in the air, is one of the most memorable in film history and priceless.

Some would argue that The Seven Year Itch (1955) is nothing but fluff, and they essentially are correct. Still, in an age of crude and obnoxious films disguised as romantic comedies, with cheesy jokes and canned humor, it is refreshing to look back to the 1950s culture, primarily an innocent era, and enjoy a fun film romp with one of cinema’s forever stars.

Big Night-1996

Big Night-1996

Director Stanley Tucci, Campbell Scott

Starring Stanley Tucci, Tony Shalhoub

Scott’s Review #300

305300

Reviewed December 16, 2015

Grade: B+

Big Night (1996) is a sweet, whimsical little film that is a food lover’s dream come true since that is the focal point of the story with more than one dish being prepared on-screen giving it realism.

It centers on the restaurant business and, specifically, how two brothers struggle to keep their failing restaurant afloat through their love and passion for food.

The story tells of two Italian immigrant brothers, Primo and Secondo, played by Tony Shalhoub and Stanley Tucci, respectively.

The time is the 1950s and they reside in blue-collar New Jersey. Times are tough for them as they try to succeed in the difficult restaurant business- they specialize in Italian food of course.

Secondo is a playboy of sorts- suave and handsome, he dates Phyllis (Minnie Driver) while galavanting with a sophisticated older woman named Gabriela, the wife of a competitor.

Primo, on the other hand, is quiet, and serious, yet an all-star chef. The food he prepares is wonderful and his talent is evident.

But how can they market themselves to be successful?

At this point, their restaurant is dying and they risk being reduced to returning to Italy or eke out a meager existence working for someone else.

An idea is announced to have a celebrity singer (Louis Prima) perform for a one-night extravaganza at their restaurant, where they will make the meal of their lives and impress the town, thus achieving success.

The film is charming and my favorite parts are on the “big night”. As the duo prepared the liquor order and shopped for flowers and other decorations in preparation, the mood and spirit left me with a warm feeling.

What a sense of togetherness Primo and Secondo, along with friends, felt to achieve this challenging goal. Inevitably, there is tension between the brothers, and between Secondo and Phyllis, but truthfully, these are merely sub-plots, and the heart of the film is in the food.

The scenes that take place in the kitchen left my mouth watering. As Secondo prepares a baked pasta dish (Timpano), the meal oozes with love and tastiness. The entire story arc is grand and magnificent.

The group of diners revels in the dining room of the restaurant enjoying spirits and dancing the night away. By morning everyone is full and drunk, both with love and alcohol, but most are happy. They get merry as they eat the night away.

I could almost taste the main course!

A subplot that works for me is the burgeoning romance between reserved Primo and equally reserved flower shop owner, Ann. Both very timid, they finally muster the courage to admit their feelings for each other while enjoying (what else?) wine and food- what better way to begin a romance?

The tenderness and chemistry between these two are very innocent and captivated me while watching the film.

The final scene of the brothers making an omelet is also wonderful and a fitting way to stress togetherness and perseverance, which is what the small film is really about.

For lovers of food, Big Night (1996) is a shining moment.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Male Lead-Tony Shalhoub, Stanley Tucci, Best First Screenplay (won), Best First Feature

Magic Mike XXL-2015

Magic Mike XXL-2015

Director Gregory Jacobs

Starring Channing Tatum, Amber Heard 

Scott’s Review #290

80031499

Reviewed November 27, 2015

Grade: F

Magic Mike XXL might be the worst film of 2015.

In the follow-up to 2012’s Magic Mike (a predictable yet decent flick), this version has neither novelty nor the basic storyline that the original contained.

Instead, audiences are treated to a lame mess of nonsense, lack of a story that makes sense or is realistic, plot holes galore, and, to nitpick a bit given the subject matter at hand, scarcely any skin!

A road trip kind of movie, I can’t quite decide if the film was targeting frat guys looking for a buddy movie or teen girls and soccer moms looking for escapism.

Even in a less-than-adequate film, I always try to find something positive to mention, whether the characters, the story, or the cinematic elements, I cannot find any redeeming value to Magic Mike XXL.

Fortunately, Matthew McConaughey had the good sense not to sign on to appear in this drivel. The same is not the case with Channing Tatum as he is the star of this installment.

Poor guy. I hope the paycheck was worth it.

The premise is as follows: Mike (Tatum), who is out of the stripper business and now runs a furniture business, receives a call that his former boss is “gone”. Mistaking this to mean he has died, Mike returns to Florida to see his old buddies, who convince him to join a stripper convention in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, to end their careers on a high note.

While on the road en route to the convention, problems, secrets, and past faces resurface to add to the drama.

Mike’s love interest from the first film is barely mentioned and dismissed in a weak story-dictated explanation. This is an attempt for Mike to have a new love interest in the character of Zoe, a photographer headed to New York, played by Amber Heard.

The film is messy from start to finish, but here are highlights (or low-lights). The silliness in conflict over coming up with a new routine fails miserably.

The character of Richie (Joe Manganiello) slinks into a convenience store and razzle dazzles a brooding cashier, making her burst with delight because she thinks he is dancing for her.

This scene is completely juvenile, watered down,  and unrealistic.

The stereotypes flow from Magic Mike XXL. En route to Myrtle Beach, the fellas make two stops that are the most ridiculous parts of the film and feature name actresses in silly roles.

When their van breaks down after an accident, a plot-driven way to allow the group to be sans vehicle,  Mike looks up an ex named Rome (a severely miscast and unappealing Jada Pinkett Smith), who runs a weird male stripper house for bachelorette’s in the middle of nowhere.

After a lame strip scene (PG-rated at best) to impress Rome, the boys are on their way again.

What was the point of introducing Rome to the story at all? And there is zero chemistry between Tatum and Smith. It seems like complete filler and the dancing scene is endless.

As if the film wasn’t bad enough already, one of the dancers looks up his love interest and the group winds up at her mother’s house.

Andie MacDowell plays a boozy fifty-something, sophisticate who is the mother of Nancy. With her group of cougar friends in tow, they flirt with the boys conjuring up every negative female stereotype imaginable.

The women are misunderstood by their husbands and feel needy and desperate.

And of course, they are all horny and drooling over the guys.

And what is with the lack of nudity or much skin? Is Magic Mike XXL not a stripper film?  Besides  Manganiello’s bare bum in one brief pool scene, there is nothing else and barely any stripping going on.

This truly makes the film weak.

Magic Mike XXL is a complete dud and I hope against hope that there will not be a third installment. If the target audience is giggly teen girls, the horrific bad writing does not say much for society these days.