When I went to see Daddy’s Home, I hated the first part of the movie.  Maybe even the first two acts.  I sat in my seat thinking to myself not just whether this would make my worst movies of the year list, but exactly what number it would be.  Then, something strange and unexpected happened.  The third act got better, caught my interest and saved the movie.  I still did not give it a great score, but my opinion changed and it avoided the worst movie of the year list.

Cue the trailers for the sequel, Daddy’s Home 2.  I actually found them entertaining.  I laughed several times at them and I, surprisingly, was looking forward to this film.

Brad (Will Farrell) and Dusty (Mark Wahlberg) had gotten the co-parenting thing down pat and were preparing to have an all-family Christmas together when it happened.  Dusty’s obnoxious father Kurt (Mel Gibson) decided to invite himself into the mix.  Throw in Brad’s over-emotional father Don (John Lithgow) and you suddenly have a severely combustible situation.

Making it even more uncomfortable, Kurt was continually trying to undermine the fragile relationship between Brad and Dusty, playing the two off each other with snarky comments and sabotage.

I have never liked Will Farrell much.  Every once in a while he does something that I think is good, but the good certainly does not out weigh the bad in my opinion.  This is his typical dumb comedy where, in place of intelligent or well-written dialogue or funny situations, Farrell does a pratfall or slams himself into the ground.  Once you’ve seen that, it really isn’t funny again.  Unfortunately, much of the best comedic parts of Daddy’s Home 2 is found in the trailers.

I do think that Farrell and John Lithgow are interesting together and this relationship could have been something that the film grabbed onto more, but it is really a side note. The storyline with the kids of the families was simply atrocious and promoted the worst examples for kids.  At one point, Dylan (Owen Vaccaro) was asking about advice for girls, and Dusty told him to go shove mistletoe above her, plant his “spaghetti slurpers” on her and then slap her on the butt.  In today’s world of sexual abuse and misconduct in Hollywood, a time where people like Harvey Weinstein, Andy Signore, Kevin Spacey are being brought down because of their inappropriate sexual advances toward others, to encourage that sort of behavior as something that can be funny is at best irresponsible and at worst criminal.

The comedy in this film might appeal to some.  There were people in the theater I saw this film in that seemed to think this was all funny.  I understand humor is subjective, but I found myself wondering exactly why these people find this obnoxious, borderline offense humor funny.  Daddy’s Home 2 takes the lowest level of comedy, mean-spirited and low bow, and presents it as funny.  I might have giggled a couple of times.

Mel Gibson was not funny.  He was too close to real life to be funny.  Plus, the character of Kurt does not earn his ending in the movie.  He never gets his learning moment and the film expects you to just accept that he now wants to improve his relationship with Dusty.  It came out of nowhere after making this guy the most obnoxious and cruel character in the film.

The film tried another third act come from behind here as well with a somewhat funny use of the song by Band Aid, “Do They Know It’s Christmas.”  However, the entire situation is soooooooooooo over the top that it stretches credibility and lost me.  The song itself was enjoyable to listen to and this was as close as I came to caring about anything in the movie.  I wonder how many people actually know that song and does it deserve the main third act focus?

Another problem with the film is that John Cena’s character Roger shows up late in the film.  The John Cena cameo was one of the best parts of the original film, but this one felt like the same old thing.  Then, with the ending segment, it felt as if the film was trying to bring together Dusty and Roger, as if that was the main relationship needing to be fixed.  It made no sense and it really undercut the finale.  Perhaps if this was the main conflict int he whole movie, like the original kind of set up in the closing minutes, but it was not.  It was tacked on to get John Cena into the film.

There are so many dumb scenes strung together ( a hunting scene, a bowling scene, the Nativity scene, a tree shopping scene) and none of the scenes had a through-line.  They were all patched together for the sake of that scene’s bad joke.

There is also a post credit scene that fits perfectly with this film.  It was mean and sad and made you feel depressed for poor John Lithgow.  I love John Lithgow, but this was an insult to him.

Daddy’s Home 2 took all of the worst parts of the first two acts of Daddy’s Home (including, literally some of the same jokes) and crammed them into the full three act structure of this movie.  The writing should have been so tighter and funnier, but there was simply nothing much here to enjoy.  One more film for the bad Will Farrell list.

1.3 stars

I had never read the Agatha Christie book, nor had I seen any of the other movie versions that preceded this new film version of Murder on the Orient Express, directed by Kenneth Branagh, so I was entering this film with brand new eyes and an excitement to match.  I also avoided reviews for this film, after a quick, early glance at Rotten Tomatoes.  Decent early score, so I was hopeful.

In the end, I liked the film, but it was not near as great as I had hoped it would be.

The world famous detective Hercule Poirot (Kenneth Branagh) had some free time on his hands, but there was no rest for the little grey cells.  He was called for another case and had to get on a train, the Orient Express.  Suddenly, there was a dead body on the train and a cabin full of suspects.  Could the masterful Poirot solve the murder?

I hope so, because I figured it out pretty early.

There are some really great things about the film, starting with Kenneth Branagh.  His take as Hercule Poirot is wonderful and he does a fantastic job giving life to one of Agatha Christie’s most famous characters.  Poirot is well developed, we have a connection to him and Branagh fills him with some great, subtle character traits that really humanizes the detective.

The film also looks tremendous.  The cinematography is top notch and the surroundings of the Orient Express are breath-taking.  There are great shots inside the train as well, showing that Branagh has quite the grip on the understanding of how to shoot in the tight spaces as well as the snowy exteriors.

There is a wonderfully talented cast in the film.  Unfortunately, it feels as if the film does not do a suitable job of allowing this amazing cast to show what they can do.  With the exception of Branagh (who was tremendous), Josh Gad, who played MacQueen, and Michelle Pfeiffer as Caroline Hubbard, the cast was wasted on background characters who seem to be nothing more than window dressing.  Honestly, I did not care for most of these characters.

The murder mystery was pretty disappointing as well.  That was mainly because it was too filled with exposition and it kept bringing new characters and pieces to the puzzle that the audience could not possibly have known.  Part of the fun of the murder mystery is being able to play along with the detective.  That was not done here.  I still guessed the eventual reveal so the film lacked in an enjoyable pay off.

Because of the last few problems, the film did feel as if it dragged on.  It was certainly a slow burn of the film, which I liked at first, but quickly found it turning dull.  Then Poirot seemed to solve the case from out of nowhere and the film took a strange path.

Still, I think the film was a decent watch and there is no doubt that Kenneth Branagh was special as Hercule Poirot.  It is a beautiful film to watch, but the fact is that the story lets the film down and the great cast is wasted.  Still, if you like murder mysteries, or an Agatha Christie story, then this might be a decent time at the theater.

3.3 stars

The mockumentary style of film has been around for several years now and we have seen areas from heavy metal music to dog shows.  You can now add hitmen to the list of topics covered with the new Taran Killam film, Killing Gunther.

Blake (Taran Killam) assembled a crew of young, up-and-coming hired assassins to help him kill the “white whale” of contract killers, Gunther.  Problem was that no one knew who Gunther was or what he looked like.  So, kidnapping a camera crew, Blake insists that they film everything as they attempt to take the place at the top of the heap by killing Gunther.

There are some definitely fun things going on in this mockumentary.  A very strong cast helps to give the film its needed gravitas as this group of assassins find themselves one step behind Gunther at every turn.

In the most intriguing casting of the film, Arnold Schwarzenegger played the role of Gunther, and, though we do not get much in way of screen time from Arnold, he is clearly having a great time hamming it up and chewing every last bit of scenery in the scenes that he does find himself in.

There are also some good side characters, especially Donnie (Bobby Moynihan of SNL fame), who is an explosion expert and Aaron Yoo as poison expert Yong.  Cobie Smulders appears as one of Blake’s former flames, Lisa.

Though there is fun to be had, it does feel like the concept is stretched a little thin.  It is as if it would have been a great short film or perhaps a great sketch on SNL, but for a whole 90+ movie, it did feel a tad dragged out.

The ending is a cop out and I wished they would have stuck with what appeared to be the original ending.  Still, there are good enough moments of humor and satire to recommend this film.  Seeing Arnold Schwarzenegger in the role makes everything worthwhile.  Just know that Arnold does not arrive until later in the film so you are not disappointed.

3.4 stars

I had gone to Bad Moms last year and found it to be a surprise. It was way funnier than I ever thought it would be and it was an enjoyable comedy.

Then, the very next year, they turn around and make the sequel, basing it at Christmas time.

This one… not near as good.  In fact, I found this one tedious and annoying.

The three “Bad Moms” return for this film, but this time, each of their own moms come to visit for the holidays.  Amy (Mila Kunis) and her mother Ruth (Christine Baranski) have a complicated relationship where Ruth s always trying to push Amy for more, and Amy feels under appreciated.  Kiki (Kristen Bell) and her mother Sandy (Cheryl Hines) are suffering from Sandy being too close to her daughter.  Finally Carla (Kathryn Hahn) and her mother Isis (Susan Sarandon) rarely see one another,only when Isis needs money for her gambling problem.

I bet you can figure out what happens in this movie.  Just like a television sitcom, the groups go through over-the-top moments that are meant to be funny and by the end of the movie, they all learn lessons and become better people.

So, since the story is so familiar, if not downright repetitive, this movie depends on the comedic aspects of the film to carry it through.  Unfortunately, with a few exceptions, none of the gags of the movie hit and it is distinctly unfunny.  Sure there are a few moments (mostly involving Kathryn Hahn) that are funny, but they are few and far between those moments that we have seen in any number of comedies like this.

Sure the cast is likable, but there is just nothing original here at all and the story is lazy.  The ending sequence simple put feels like the wash and rinse writing that we have seen a million times.  Christine Baranski, while a great actress, is basically playing a version of the character she plays on the Big Bang Theory.

It really feels as if the quick turnaround from original hit movie to sequel hurt this film. It feels rushed and the humor suffers from it.  Where as the original film had a distinct flare to it, this one lacks anything that will stand out, with an exception of Kathryn Hahn and one of the Santa strippers.  Many times comedies have a difficult with sequels and, to me, this one is no exception.

2.1 stars

The new biopic from Rob Reiner focuses on the events that led to Texas born Senator Lyndon Baines Johnson (Woody Harrelson) to ascend to the Presidency of the United States after the assassination of John F. Kennedy (Jeffrey Donovan).

I had seen another movie (Selma) about the same situation, detailing the 1964 Civil Rights Law, and that movie had some differences int he character of LBJ.  It is hard to say which was the real image of LBJ, but both showed him as a brusque, gruff and profane.  Both films, however, made LBJ look like a good man.

Reiner’s LBJ is told both in current day (the day of the assassination) and in flashbacks to the 1959-60 Presidential race between Kennedy and Johnson, prior to LBJ being offered the Vice-President slot.  The film is weaved together well until the election is completed. Then the story picks up from current day, seeing how LBJ was sworn in as President and began to push JFK’s agenda.

Woody Harrelson is very good in this film the heavy facial prosthetics that he had to wear.  Honestly, there were a lot of times when I found myself staring at his face, trying to determine what parts were actually Woody’s face.  Despite the distracting makeup, Harrelson displayed a very strong leader who, while perhaps not couth, was desperate for people to connect to him, love him.

It was intriguing to watch Johnson work, a politician at this core, straining to find ways to compromise and to get bills through Congress.  Too bad we don’t have anyone like LBJ today, because we certainly need someone like him.

The film was pretty short, so it did not get a chance to really dive deeply into the successes LBJ had.  It would have been interesting to see the moments in his life that led to his decision to not run for a second term in 1968 or to go into more specifics about the Vietnam War that was dragging the country into the muck at the time, however, these historic moments were delegated to the boxed text at the end of the film.

Overall, the film delivered an interesting lead character who did some amazing things, but who may not have always done the right thing.

3 stars

Most everyone is using one extremely fitting word to describe Thor:Ragnarok: fun.  From start to finish, the third film in the Thor series is just a tremendously enjoyable ride full f humor, action, wonderfully weird characters and fun.

Taika Waititi, director of What We Do in the Shadows and The Hunt for the Wilderpeople, brings so much of his own directorial style into Thor: Ragnarok that it is amazing that Marvel Studios, a studio that has had some directors have had issues with in the past, apparently allowed his such free reign to create a Thor movie unlike any other Thor movie before it, while still honoring what had come prior.

Thor (Chris Hemsworth) returns to Asgard to find his brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) ruling in the place of Odin (Anthony Hopkins).  Thor forces Loki to show him what he had done to Odin, and this winds up releasing the Goddess of Death Hela (Cate Blanchett), who has returned to claim Asgard as her own.  Thor gets banished and winds up on Sakaar, a planet run by the Grandmaster (Jeff Goldblum), and ends up in Grandmaster’s Contest of Champions vs. the Hulk (Mark Ruffalo)

There are so many wonderful parts to Thor: Ragnarok that it is difficult to hit them all.  Chris Hemsworth is remarkable as Thor and he is allowed to show what an exceptional comedic actor that he is in this film.  He delivers his lines with the perfect timing and stands out.  The relationship with Thor and Loki, perhaps the most complicated relationship in the MCU, continues to be at the center of this movie, and each scene between Hensworth and Hiddleston shows how much chemistry they have with one another and how important they are to one another.

Mark Ruffalo is fantastic as Hulk/Bruce Banner.  He brings believable differences between the two characters (the ultimate Jekyll and Hyde combo).  This is the first time we can really see his work in the Hulk too, since we get a Hulk that can talk and communicate, even if that communication is like a 2-year old.  The Hulk is brilliantly portrayed as the monstrous rage beast, but also as someone who is lonely and wants a friend.  And Banner shows his heroic side despite his own continuing fears of being lost within the Hulk persona.  Plus, the Hulk/Thor hoss fight was brutally awesome.

There are a ton of great new characters here as well.    Tessa Thompson as Valkyrie is kick ass and brings as much to this role as you could possibly bring.  The flashbacks of the Valkyries battle with Hela, which looked as if it were a painting- a work of art, brought this character an importance that was unexpected.  Jeff Goldblum was doing his very best Jeff Goldblum as the Grandmaster. I sat in the theater waiting for the film to start thinking about the world I live in– where I was about to see a major motion picture that was going to feature the Grandmaster.  Amazing, and Goldblum was a riot.  Taika Waititi himself had a great knew role as the rock creature Korg, who was continually funny.  Karl Urban as Skurge the Executioner had an unexpectedly strong character arc as well, playing Hela’s right hand man.

Without going into spoilers, the ending sequence in Asgard was as surprising and original of an ending we have seen in the MCU.  It ranks up there with “I have come to bargain” of Dr. Strange fame in subversive finales in the super hero genre.

Speaking of Dr. Strange, it is known that Benedict Cumberbatch is in the film, and Ragnarok actually took the post credit scene from Dr. Strange where Thor is enjoying a beer and wove it into Ragnarok’s narrative seamlessly.  Cumberbatch’s role is basically a cameo, but it is an amazing one and worth a mention.

There are also a few cameos on Asgard that I won’t spoil that are perfect.

Some people have claimed that this movie is without stakes, but I disagree.  We have major Thor characters in this film die as well as the unbelievable ending that completely shakes up Thor’s corner of the MCU.  Plus, with the Tesseract making its presence known once again, it beautifully sets up this film’s connection to Avengers: Infinity War and Thanos’s ultimate arrival.

The film flows beautifully and the pacing is great.  You never feel bored during the film because you have something new to laugh at.  The colors are something different for Thor than any past Thor movies.  The color scheme is more like the Guardians of the Galaxy than Thor.  Perhaps this is the color palate that the MCU Cosmic films are all going to adapt.  If that is the case, I am all for it.

There may have been a couple of scenes where the green screen stood out too much (particularly with the Thor/Loki/Odin scene), but that was a minor quip.  Most of this film is wonderfully put together and the CGI was well done.

I still think this is one step behind Logan as the best comic movie of the year, but it is in the discussion.  Thor: Ragnarok is laugh out loud funny while taking the character of Thor is a different direction and installing in him a freshness that the character truly needed.  Plus, a new haircut.

4.9 stars

I wanted no part of this one.

I did not like any of the trailers for The Mountain Between Us and the story just did not appeal to me.  Nothing against Idris Elba and Kate Winslet, whom I enjoy, but I just did not want to see it.  Then, when the reviews came out and they were basically panning the film, it reaffirmed my choice.

However, I have gone to other movies that I did not want to see, so my lack of seeing this movie also was about scheduling.  There were times when it was showing that I just was unavailable for or going to something else.  It felt like the perfect storm.

However, I found a gap in my schedule and it happened to be playing so I decided to go ahead and see the film, with full knowledge that my expectations were very low.  And. much like other times when you go with expectations very low, the movie doesn’t seem to be as bad as you expected.

Again, let me stress this, The Mountain Between Us is not a good movie, by any stretch.  I just did not hate it as much as I anticipated.

Kate Winslet played Alex Martin, who is desperately trying to get home for her wedding, but her flight is cancelled because of incoming bad weather.  Idris Elba’s Dr. Ben Bass was in the same boat, trying to get to a patient.  The twosome got together and decided to try to head around the airport by renting a two seat plane, piloted by Beau Bridges.

I bet you see where this is heading.

Bridges has some kind of stroke (or something) while flying and the plane crashes in the mountains, leaving Ben and Alex (and Bridge’s dog, named Dog) to try to survive the snowy mountaintop and the dangers of Mother Nature.

If this would have just settled on being a survival movie, then it might have been passable, although, honestly, some of the worst parts of this movie dealt with the survival aspects.  We’ll come back to that.  The problem was this movie decided to turn itself into a love story as well between Elba and Winslet, and it devolved into so much melodrama that you can hardly stand it.

Not only that, but Elba and Winslet did not have much, if any, chemistry on screen.  I mean, both actors did what they could, but the script just did not give them anything.  The performances by the two lead actors are reasonable, but these characters just were not worthy of the acting chops these two stellar actors possess.

Now, back to the survival parts.  I did not believe that they were ever in real jeopardy, nor did I believe that either character felt as if they were in any danger.  Even though they talked about dying and the dangers around them, I never bought the feeling of stakes between the characters.  We see only the minimal amount of effects of the surroundings on Ben and Alex.  At one point, Alex falls through the ice into the water, and she is in there for several seconds until Ben can pull her free.  He rushed her off to the cabin that he had just conveniently found to warm her up and give her a makeshift IV.  No consequences for Alex for spending that time in the water.  Neither character lost any toes or fingers, despite the hours they spent walking through knee deep snow.

They also always seemed to be finding supplies or shelter or whatever they needed just in the nick of time.  I was sure that they would be eating that dog before too long, but they never got to that point in desperation.

The passage of time was also out of whack here.  There is no way to gauge how long they were out there until Alex specifically says it.

Then, the ending, without spoiling it, it barf-tacular.  The film is pretty predictable so just think about how a melodramatic movie where the two heroes survive the outdoors might end up and you would probably be able to guess how this one ended up.

Positives.  Well, Idris Elba and Kate Winslet are very likable actors and you want to root for them.  They give good performances for what they were given.  The film has beautiful shots of the snow covered mountains and the outdoors.  Plus, the film was not as terrible as I thought it was going to be.

This felt much like a Lifetime movie with big name stars.  Had I not gone to this, I would not have missed much. But I did, and so I would rate this…

2.4 stars

PTSD is explored in the new war movie that really focuses on the aftermath of the situations the soldiers are placed in.  Based on a true story, this film has some powerful moments when looking at the lives of these three soldiers returning from Iraq.

Unfortunately, the film only does an okay job of making connections with the audience with those characters.

Adam Schumann (Miles Teller), Solo (Beulah Koale) and Billy Waller (Joe Cole) are returning from Iraq after a tragic event cost the life of their SFC James Doster (Brad Beyer).  Dealing with guilt, the memories of what had happened and serious cases of PTSD, the three friends struggle to adapt to life back in the US and to try and find help for their conditions.

The strongest aspect of this film is the deplorable manner that these men are treated by our government and the health care community.  These veterans had to desperately seek help from anyone able to give it, only to find more red tape and lack of empathy.  Even those who are empathetic to the soldiers’ cases are limited by time and what they can actually do.

Coupled that with the terrible stresses connected to PTSD, the film shows a dramatic image of three damaged soldiers, even heroes, who can’t seem to get proper care or help despite their terms of service to our country.  This should really be a national shame to the United States that something like this is allowed to go on.

However, as a movie, Thank You For Your Service has some flaws.  I could have used some more connections shown me to build the relationship between these three men.  There are some scenes, but not enough to really draw me into their stories.  Several of the scenes are spoken about instead being shown to us and that just is never a solid way to run a movie.

Second, some of the soldiers’ relationships outside of their unit were weaker and that did not make me connect emotionally when some of them started to fall apart.  I did like the relationship between Miles Teller and Haley Bennett though, as that relationship truly felt real and loving.  The other two relationships did not receive any screen time at all and it did not draw me in like Teller and Bennett’s relationship does.

Amy Schumer is in this movie as well in a rare dramatic role.  She is not on screen for long, but she was decent.  I spent most of the time trying to convince myself that it was her hidden under the dark hair that she now had.

I think I would rather had more outrage against the system that the film seems to start with, but discarded for nonsensical plots such as a drug/arms dealer story.  While there are good moments, the film does feel a tad too forgettable and not the powerful social message that it could have been.

3.4 stars