Reviews

There have been many a sports movie made where a team comes together to overcome adversity. The protagonists are usually somewhat likable and you want them to succeed.

I've made it 42 minutes into this movie and I'm turning it off because at this point, I really don't care.

Honestly, this strikes me as a vanity project where some former Ivy Leaguers towers wanted to relate to the rest of us heathens in the world and show us how tough they had it in their struggle to beat Harvard. It's not like these guys are less talented or a bunch of scrubs like the Bad News Bears. They just don't work together as well. And the new coach is going to teach them to do that...wow.

The dialog and writing are down right corny. Our "brooding" characters, when told its Saturday night and asked to go out partying, says he's determined to study and "he's not getting out of this chair". So of course, his teammates proceed to tape him in the chair and carry him into the bar....where he proceeds to get drunk and insult the mysterious girl who will obviously become his love interest. Later, when he comes to apologize with flowers, she doesn't say "ok thank you now go away" but threatens to call security. She trashes the flowers, only for her roommate to find him and show her the secret coded Shakespeare reference to show "what a sensitive guy he is"....

I really can't imagine how much worse this movie gets.

Michael Shannon is a good actor and deserved better.

As others have allowed, you would think with the talented actors attached to this it would be a strong movie, but it's not.

Waltz was probably miscast here. Ok, we don't have to see King Shultz or Hans Landa but he really did little or nothing to carry the film as it's "star". His character was not nearly as compelling or well acted as Dafoe's. The choice to put him in a fedora just compounded the issue. Brosnahan was unsympathetic and seemed to be just as bad as the husband she was running from. Warren Burke and Brandon Scott just seemed like props who were used by the main players with no type of character development themselves. Benjamin Bratt - other than "oh, he's bad" we never really got any incite as to his motivations. Certainly it wasn't clear what happened between his character and Martin Kidd, or what their ultimate plan was.

There was very little tension or drama. Dafoe shot Bratt quickly, and then Waltz shot him. Roll Credits. Bland. It would have been a better movie if, in a "twist" a Dafoe has saved Waltz life or the other way around, and they parted with "let's not meet again".

This movie just had the feel of a made-for-TV movie from the 1980s (other than a few expletives thrown in). Juvenile is the best word I can use to describe the script. Was it written by AI? I don't know, but the movie was just "off".

I gave it a 5, and that may have been a little generous. It had potential to be better, but it fell well short.

There are a lot of bad things to say about this movie. The acting outside of the four lead characters is horrendous, and with those four it's merely passable. It moves along slowly to start. It has plot holes. There may be a couple of pages of the script that got lost. And did I mention how terrible most of the acting was?

But there is also something endearing about this low-budget independent flick. It has a story. The actors that play Dave, Doc, Sally and Nalia bring a charm to their characters. The time travel and future elements are interesting enough to hook you in, with exposition about some "cool" changes in store for the future. The movie even has a few of its own "3 sea shells" style gags.

I'll this - I've watched movies with bigger name actors and much bigger budgets that I haven't been as satisfied watching.

The basic premise is that Dave is an orphan who has just turned 18. He meets Doc and Sally who are academics who ask him to look after their estate, explaining that they are traveling into the future. Dave helps them, but then decides he wants to make the trip as well, only to overshoot. He winds up in a time that seems more simple and in some ways primitive, but also has advanced technology. There he meets Nalia. A group of people think that Dave is "the devils child" and their leader Samuel is out to get them.

The drama isn't high, and the bad acting reduces any tension that might be around, but everything works out in the end.

Again, this is by no means a great or really even good movie. But it's charming and satisfying. I'll give it a 4.5 and round it up to 5.

Scott Caan is our hero, Jackie Powers, who under duress enters a diner to shoot JK Simons who owes a debt to Frank Grillo. Caan messes up the hit, instead shooting the diner's cook and killing him. Simmons escapes. The only witness is a waitress named Lola Brisky played by Marianne Rendon, who Powers kidnaps.

We learn that Powers was working for Grillo in order to get help getting his 16 year old son out of JD. Lo and behold Brisky's mother played by Virginia Madsen is rich and dying, and Brisky can only get her inheritance if she's married.

She and Powers formulate a plan to help each other. Brisky's mother is fond of Powers, and ageees to help, however she passes away before they can get the check for the lawyer. This results in Powers eventually posing as his son's lawyer, with Brisky pretending to be the boys mother, and the judge releasing the son to her custody. The trio decide that they are going to abscond to Costa Rica.

While all of that is going on, we have several poorly written scenes that form a side plot with Simmons and Grillo, over $100,000 that was owed and not paid. The dialog is corny and doesn't really make sense. This leads to a similarly poorly directed shootout where Simmons Is killed and police seemingly arrest Grillo.

This movie has potential. It obviously had some name actors, though they couldn't do much with what they had to work with. It wasn't terrible, but it wasn't quite good either. At least it had somewhat of a happy ending.

..... And just in case you decide to stick around through the credits, don't be fooled by the post credit scene. According to an article I read, it is nothing more than a rehash of an earlier scene in the movie with a local who won a contest acting opposite Caan.

Our hero is Cole, played admirably by Anthony Montgomery. He's a truck driver who wakes up on a plane along with six other people including the US Secretary of Transportation, a government contractor, a student, a housewife, an IT guy and a linguist. All seven reportedly blacked out and don't know how they got on the plane. They find a single cellphone and watch a news broadcast from Houston which states that much of the east coast of the US has been destroyed before ending with what appears to be the destruction of Houston in the background.

As the film progresses, we learn that the folks are on the plane as part of operation chariot, designed to save certain folks in the wake of an attack. The plane they are on is headed for Andrews Air Force base near Washington DC - however, they learn it has been destroyed and so a person they are able to communicate with on the ground tells them to go to the Bahamas instead. Unfortunately, the pilots have locked the door to the cockpit and refuse to communicate with them, so they must find a way to "break in" to the cockpit.

This first part of the movie is very strong but then it starts to strain credulity starting with the passengers breaking into the cockpit and shooting both the pilot and the co-pilot - generally a bad idea when you're in the air and no one else knows how to fly. Considering the whole idea was to save their own lives by telling the pilots not to go to DC, this was pretty dumb they even considered shooting the pilots instead of just temporarily incapacitating them.

The second major faux pas in this film was the character of Genevieve who we learn knew that the whole event was staged as a dry run, but still shot the pilot and the co-pilot. IF it was truly a test that she knew about, doesn't that level of participation skew the result? If it's testing how the people from the population would react, then why not simply have the pilots "in" on it? Or if they're really testing the pilots too, they why not give them weapons with blanks or otherwise have some type of coded failsafe to let them know "ok, this is a drill" at a certain point.

Finally, I know this is probably more "Hollywood" logic, but a small criticism at the end was that other than "Ra" going up to the cockpit for a little pep talk, no one else tried to offer any help landing the plane (like Mr. Internet guru googling "landing checklist") or even trying to get the radio to work, or a phone to work to call them and talk them down (the major character could have had a change of heart and done this, with little effect on the overall message). I do note that they didn't show the actual landing, which is fine.

These criticisms took what could have been a gem of a movie as an 8 and dropped it down to a 6. That's still pretty good for such a low budget movie. The acting was above average and the script, aside from a few big flaws, was good.

I'll just address the elephant in the room right off - they should have axed half the plot and gone ahead and made Jessica Chastang Charlie Baltimore's daughter. Yes, I know technically she would be about 12 years too old for the part, but she could have pulled it off and it would have been a much better movie.

As it were, this wasn't bad as a formulating action movie about a burned out assassin who is herself targeted to be "closed out". There are a lot of plot holes that don't make sense (why kill her, just don't give her any more jobs). As with any action movie, there's a certain level of disbelief required that one person could easily dispose of so many bad guys and show few signs of being worse for the wear. But if things like that bother you, don't watch.

As others have commented, all of the melodrama surrounding her personal life really didn't play well. OK, I get she had some unresolved childhood issues that led her to alcohol and drugs...and it's cool that she got things resolved with her mom. But the whole sister - who must be cool cause she's in a band - winds up dating her ex-gambling addict boyfriend who has no problem getting hot and heavy with her until she asks him to run away with her and then suddenly becomes noble because "Jude's pregnant"....that was a little too much.

As I say, it wasn't a bad movie. But with some solid and likable actors like Chastain, Malkovic, Farrell, Common and Geena Davis it could have been a lot better.

And yeah, a sequel to The Long Kiss Goodnight would have been way better.

This movie is probably a 5 but I always like to bump a point for being "enjoyable". I've seen better crafted movies that I didn't like as much. So I'll give it it six.

I literally turned this movie off 2 minutes in because I couldn't get past the stupidity of the exposition filled dialogue. I saw I needed to see when (for SOME reason in the Florida Panhandle) they were debriefing a pilot and had to explain to him why he went on a bombing mission, several months ago - though it's urgent he tell them everything now!

We then cut to a scene on the deck of the USS Hornet...".gee Colonel is this a drill? ". "No it's for real". "But we're 400 miles further away than we thought, we will have enough gas" ?

If you want to see a great movie about the Doolittle raid, watch 30 seconds over Tokyo. It tells the story of training through the heroic assistance of the Chinese to help them escape afterwards. It's got well written dialog that makes sense. It actually has pretty good special effects for the time as well as some real footage.

Our main character Harry has witnessed the death of his wife and daughter as the result of a hit and run accident. Those responsible are a group of gangsters who were in the getaway vehicle fleeing an armed robbery.

Five years after their death, Harry is working as a custodian in a church. He is suicidal and a broken man. One day, he receives a letter from a private investigator saying he has a lead on the identity of the men.

From there Harry, who is clearly not skilled in such, decides to extract his vengeance on the men. This is not a simple or easy task for him. Along the way he is wounded several times, including multiple stab wounds and being thrown off a balcony in the church. However, in the end, he is successful in taking out the bad guys.

I thought the best part of the movie was, especially in comparison to something like "death wish" where the lead character was an architect, Harry stays true to being an Everyman. He is hesitant in shooting and he certainly makes mistakes not "finishing the bad guys off" which nearly costs him his life.

The movie was obviously a low-budget affair, and there were a few scenes where the director tried to become too artsy - particularly with the flashbacks. Some have suggested that the movie was a "death dream" and point to these flashbacks, but I just think it was amateurish film making as also demonstrated by characters flying every time they got shot, and the way the credits and titles were done in the movie. Now, maybe the director has come out and said "yes, I was trying to make this ambiguous" ... but it certainly seemed to me it was just overkill in selling the idea that he was getting vengeance. Similarly, I felt like the ending was pretty clear that he lay down on the grave and was going to kill himself to join his wife and daughter, but instead he "left them go" and stopped holding on. His going to meet the woman on the beach by the cliffs 100% shows that he chose to keep on living. Conversely, if he had gone to "heaven" he would be with his wife and daughter.

I gave this movie a 7 out of 10. In looking at the score on IMDB it's currently at 5 which I think is too low because it's much more entertaining and enjoyable than that. On the other hand, this thing has a tone of user reviews from back in 2021 which mostly rate it as an 8 (some 9s and 10s) that are just a wee bit too high...with some almost seeing fake. It's a solid movie for a low budget picture. Seven is a very respectable, and accurate, score.

This review is flagged with spoilers so I can go ahead reference the ending where our hero is paid off in Greenland's currency which he's not sure about the exchange rate on, and the payment is laid out of 200 months or something - so it's not quite clear that our hero is a winner - which is an appropriate description of how I feel after watching this movie.

I finished it, I think I enjoyed it and took something from it, I'll tell people about it....but I'm not sure if I really "won".

Was there some message I was supposed to get? I sorta thought that when the cowboy brings up Ellen and his girlfriend on the bench and asks him if he gets it...or tells him he watched too many westerns as a kid.....but apparently I missed it.

It seemed like there should have been a twist...like, it was a setup by his family to help him get past his father leaving and girlfriend breaking up with him. I guess the whole Anna Kendrick really wasn't playing the game and him finding out in the middle of the movie was somewhat of a twist, though disappointing, and I'm not sure that it made sense he just walked away when he found out. I mean - she's still Anna Kendrick!

The movie tries to be quirky and funny, and I guess it hits at times but misses in other parts. Particularly the ending. I'd give it about a 6.3 but since I'm real generous I'll round it up to 7.

I saw the actors listed on this movie...Val Kilmer, Michael Biehn, Sharon Stone, .50, Barry Shabaka Henley and thought this would be a pretty good movie.

I saw the setup - post Katrina New Orleans and thought, hey this is gonna be a pretty good movie.

Then I heard Sharon Stone talk in her best "Souuuthernnn Ahk-scent" as if she just watched Steal Magnolias and Foghorn Leghorn and I said, OK, ive seen Hollywood do worse...it's still gonna be a good movie.

Then I kept watching the movie, and well it's just bad and it's obvious the people who made it had no clue. The dialog hints this as of course, certain characters call each other "bro" and "cuz" because that's what they're supposed to do. Of course, since were in New Orleans we have to have "Decoreaux and Delacroix". The Latin Kings gang is featured prominently despite not really being prominent in New Orleans where the gangs are more often based on their ward in the parish or the area they come from.

The idea of cops coming down in low level dealers to "keep their park clean" is just hilarious.

Michael Biehn choking a guy with Mardi Gras beeds.....guh!

The thing is, this movie coulda been a lot better. It was a disappointment. I gave it at 3 instead of a 1 which is more like it deserved. I finished it out of obligation but I wish I had my time back.

After watching this movie and reading the reviews, the best thing that I can say is...it's complicated. People are going to watch this movie and see the story differently.

Upon entry is the story of a couple, Diego and Elena, emigrating from Spain to the United States. They are selected for extra screening at customs, which becomes a long an arduous process for them. From the beginning, the agents who deal with them are very terse, and while maybe not discourteous they certainly are not polite either. The couple is taken from the original intake area to a secondary area without explanation. Their concerns about making a connecting flight and wanting to contact a family member they were hoping to meet on their layover are ignored by the agents. They are subjected to numerous questions, some of a personal nature, which may be necessary and reasonable but are handled with little tact by the agents.

As our story develops, we find that Diego has previously tried to gain entry to the US and been denied. It is also revealed that prior to the start of relationship with Elena, he was engaged to a woman who lived in the United States that he had never met in person. It also appears there was some overlap between that relationship and his with Elana. He also had not told Elana about the relationship. It also showed that Diego was from Venezuela and didn't want to go back, so he was somewhat dependent on Elena - certainly to get into the US because she won the Visa lottery.

Now, in my mind the movie presented these in a manner that raised suspicion - but it did not seem to give a clear answer to it. I somewhat think that the investigators weren't sure either, but just hoped to interrogate them so harshly to see if they would break - either that or they were just pure sadist.

As the interrogation comes to a close, it appears that Elena has become completely distrustful of Diego. However, she is told at the end of her solo interrogation that she can come into the country without him. The film cuts away before she answers, and shows her being led back into the waiting room where she intentionally sits several seats away from Diego. She appears hurt, and says she just wants to go home. Diego seemingly tries to explain himself, causing her to leave to use the restroom where she washes her face, and seemingly composed herself.

Both are called to the desk where, their passports are stamped and they are told "welcome to America" with the film Immediately ending.

What I take from this movie is that it actually poses a question to the viewer by showing people "at their worst" and asking you to make a decision about them. I like to think that the immigration agents are overworked, underpaid, have a very hard job and were having a very bad day...but had a legitimate purpose rather than simply being bad people. I like to believe that Elena and (especially) Diego were 100 percent legitimate in their aims, even if they weren't always perfect.

I gave this movie a high rating because I believe it is well done, thought provoking a worth a watch.

BJ Novak has hit a home run with with film that he directs and also stars in.

Novak plays Ben, who at one point he self-describes as a self-absorbed know it all. He is part of the New York "hook up culture".

One night he gets a call from Ty Shaw in Texas whose sister, Abilene, has died under suspicious circumstances. The Shaw family seem to believe that Ben was Abilene's boyfriend despite the fact they had only hooked up a few times. Ben travels to the funeral, after which Ty asks him to help him get vengeance against her killer.

Ben condescending looks down on the Shaw family, but decides to stay to produce a pod cast under the guise of investigating Abilene's death.

Along the way, he meets people who live their life in a much different way from what he is accustomed too. He learns more about Abilene and her family - the aforementioned Ty, sisters Kansas City and Paris, brother "el stupido", her mother and grandmother. He learns about Whataburger, the politics of Texas law enforcement, the rodeo, that "bless your heart" is a euphemism for f-you and drug dealers secretly like Harry Potter. He also comes across a Yale-educated transplant, music producer and philosopher played by Ashton Kutcher who, for all his intellect and fancy talk, lacks character.

Early in the movie, Ben talks about wanting to discover America...but as the movie progresses, he finds he discovers himself, and more importantly his character.

The movie obviously does a lot to contrast the different morays that shape life on the urban east coast vs more rural parts of America. While it's not overtly political, it certainly tries to dig into the deeper root causes the have created a divide between "red and blue", including the often condescending attitude that so-called "elites" have. Course, it also balances that out by calling out those who seemingly covet conspiracy theories as a coping mechanism.

In the end, despite a brief falling out with the Shaw family - including finding out that Abilene did in fact have a drug problem - Ben does follow through by getting Vengeance. He also decides to delete his podcast and just keep the story between them.

This was a great movie. Funny in parts, relatable and will a compelling story that kept me glued.

They coulda named this movie 12 Angry Parents, except, maybe there weren't 12 of them.

Instead of a trial, the parents of our 4th graders as a prestigious school have been called in because a brick of weed was found during the rehearsal for the school play, and before calling the cops (so as not to damage the reputation of the school) the administrators have given the parents an hour to figure out what to do.

Of course, the parents as this school all bring in their own issues.... You have the dominant alpha pageant/show mom whose daughter has the lead in the play, the overworked lawyer with the sick wife who is in charge of the booster club, a salesman who can't hold a job much to the displeasure of his father in law, a lesbian couple where one is a recovering addict, an older couple who bicker and adopted, a wanna be actress, a porn star/director, a "Jewish" woman who dresses in gothic style and a poor guy working three jobs whose daughter got a scholarship....and he wants to be a professional video game player. They go back and forth first trying to figure out who brought the weed in, then deciding one must be sacrificed to preserve the reputation of the school by drawing lots.

In the end, after the alpha mom has her daughters name drawn and storms out threatening to take down the school, they come to realize the whole thing was a prank and the brick of weed (that some rolled a joint off and smoked) is actually manure.

It's got a few funny parts, but most of the humor falls flat. Some of it is actually cringe worthy, like the breakdown of the salesman. There's supposedly a mild romantic subplot in there between our gamer and our faux widow who (is really a writer pretending to be Jewish trying to get into character for a book)

It was a good idea, but the execution falls very flat despite having several talented actors.

I read a review that summed up this movie as "a powerful character piece centered around the connection of broken individuals....". I've seen others compare it to Dead Poets Society. I think both are wrong.

This is simply a story about three people who are stuck together over the Christmas holiday. It doesn't try to be as pretentious as a "powerful character piece" on seemed contrived. It's just a story - and I mean that is a most complimentary way. It's a positive, beautiful, at times heartwarming story about how people can be.

The three main characters are Paul a teacher at the school, Mary who works in the cafeteria and lost her son in Vietnam and Angus a student whose mother & step father have shipped him off to boarding school and whose father turns out to be in a mental hospital. The all have issues, but in the two weeks they are stuck together they are nice to each other and work thru them.

It was an enjoyable story to watch unfold. It kept my interest. The ending was "bittersweet but hopeful" which did bother me a little, as the cynic is me, while I appreciate that Paul Giamatti was willing to sacrifice his job for the good of the kid, realizes that the whole idea he is now "free to pursue his dreams" is a lie - he's got no degree and no job! That sounds like a like "the man" tries to tell ya, you know.

I will also that the recurring idea regarding Paul not being willing to give the senators/donors son a fake grade, the fact that he was wrongfully accused in a plagiarism scandal, and then his eventual decision to lie when he felt it was valid was thought provoking...whether intentional or not. Maybe it was because the characters develop the habit throughout the show.

Overall, I give this movie a solid 8. Maybe I should give it a nine...but I really don't think this movie wants that - which is what makes it great.

In closing, I'll say that I watched Sideways again after seeing this, and I can't help but referencing that movie in my assessment of this one. My thought in particular involves a scene where Miles tastes a wine and goes on to give a long, pompous sounding dissertation on describing it, to which Jack follows by taking a sip and saying (read in your best THC/Lowell voice) "yeah, that's good".

I'll start by saying that my first exposure to this film was on a message board, where posters were talking about several disgusting scenes including the main character slurping the bath water of another individual who had apparently pleasured himself while in it, another where the main character orally pleasured a female who was menstruating and finally one of the main character nude and "grinding" on a freshly covered grave. I guess the say "no publicity is bad publicity" as I took the time to read some other reviews which were mixed. Many compared it to The Talented Mr. Ripley for a somewhat similar plot line of a "con man" ingratiating himself to a wealthy person only to later murder him and attempt to profit.

I decided to go ahead and watch it, with the idea I'd turn it off it it got too bad.

The movie starts off well enough. Barry Keoghan is Oliver Quick, a scholarship student who is an outcast at a new school. One day, he comes across a popular (and wealthy) student Felix whose bike has a flat tire and he loans him his. The two become friends despite some tension due to their backgrounds and social status. Felix seems to be drifting away however, before Oliver drops the bombshell that his drug dealing father has died...and that his equally drug addicted mother is a complete disaster. Felix decides to invite Oliver (don't call him Oscar) home to his big mansion for the summer.

We come to find out that Felix and the Catton clan and pretty despicable and flawed people. Felix's mom Elsbeth has a house guest/pet project that she saved, but has since grown tired of and throws out in the middle of the night. When the woman later commits suicide, Elsbeth coldly says "she'll do anything for attention". Cousin Farleigh, also a student at school, acts terrible toward Oliver - in part because he himself is a "pet project" despite being family. Oliver is oddly obsessed with Felix, though they have a brief falling out over Felix hooking up with his sister Venitia after Farliegh rats him out. But they reconcile, and the rest of the fam likes Oliver and decides to throw him a birthday party. As a surprise, Felix also decides to take him to see him mom only to discover that.... Oliver totally lied about his middle class slightly nerdy but otherwise normal parents.

From there, we get a weird themed birthday party with 200 people at a mansion who don't even know Oliver's name, Oliver professing his love to Felix in a maze, only to have Felix found dead the next morning with Oliver pining the blame on cousin Farliegh and his drug use. Of course, the family has to go along with lunch like nothings wrong. Oliver tries to seduce Venetia in the bathtub, only to have her reject him and later commit suicide. At some point in there, Oliver had relations with the mud covering Felix's grave. Old pop Catton decides to pay off Oliver to leave because, well, at this point it's just in the script. So he does.

Flash forward to 14 years later. Elsbeth has a "chance" wink wink encounter with Oliver, telling him that Papa Catton is now dead and inviting him to Saltburn. We get a lot of flash backs and flash aheads showing that Oliver poisoned Felix, and if he didn't directly kill Venetia he helped move her suicide along. He weasels his way in to taking care of Elsbeth...I took it as potentially he did something to poison her and get her sick before eventually completely ending her by removing her breathing tube. We further find out that Oliver also initiated the flat tire on Felix's bike, and further set up a situation where Felix "found" some money he dropped so he could buy a round of shots during a bonding moment.

The movie ends with Oliver now the owner of Saltburn dancing around naked.

If it sounds like a lot to unpack, it was. I guess there is some "moral" to the story - whether It was supposed to be a warning against wealth and excess, or one against obsession and greed I'm not quite sure. As I mentioned, every main character in the movie was selfish and manipulative. There weren't really any "good" guys here.

I'm not sure that I'd recommend this movie. I'd more say, "watch it, you may like it". I was entertained by it, but don't really care to see it again. The aforementioned "disgusting" parts were obviously added to set the tone, and may have been overkill, but weren't so bad I couldn't go ewww and turn away till the scene changed. I actually thought the biggest mistake was the 14 year gap and wondering why the guy hadn't moved on to some new obsession.

I had seen a trailer for the movie years ago, and thought it looked good, but never saw it. Today, I was flipping thru Tubi and came across it, and am glad I did.

Had I seen this movie 10 years ago, I might refer to Sisu as having "the kid who played Oskari in Big Game". Onni Tommila was great in the role. His real life Jorma Tommila played his father here, before starting in the title role in Sisu.

The plot suspends a little belief, with elements of Air Force One, White House Down and Olympus has fallen rolled into a story where the bad guys are trying to get the President. At the same time Oskari, a 13 year old boy, is on his first big solo hunt and out to prove himself by coming back with a big trophy. His father is loving, but doesn't have a lot of faith in him.

Our hero comes across the President's downed escape pod and frees him, though he isn't in much hurry to return him to society before the hunt is over. Enter the bad guys, who capture the President, played by Samuel L Jackson in an unusual turn as a bit of a (at least physically) wimp who also seems to be without the use of his favorite 12 letter phrase....

Oskari springs to action and helps to save the day.

It's just a great story. It's well paced. You root for the good guys and they win. The bad guys, sans one, all get their comeuppance. I hate I missed it all these years.

I'm just going to say right off that whether it was the writer or director that made it, the choice to have the alien spacecraft fueled by dead cats was in poor taste and pretty much ruined my enjoyment of the movie. Yes, I understand that the plot involved Jane Curtain's compassionate sacrifice of her long-term feline companion....but there were also jokes about "fractions" of other animals.

It's very sad that the writing and/or director made this choice, because they otherwise put out a very touching story. The acting of Curtain, Kingsley and especially Harriet Harris (Bebe from Frasier) was top notch. The humor was well timed. The characters were relatable as you saw how each dealt with getting old in their own way. They also had to deal with the way society treated their aging.

I'd probably score this movie a 9 out of 10 without the poor plot element, because it was that good otherwise. I would have recommended it to my 75 year old mother among others. I'd have watched it again myself. But I can't. I actually feel like a lot of folks in the target audience like myself won't like that part of it. On the other hand, folks that totally aren't bothered by the "cats as fuel" aren't likely to enjoy the rest of the movie.

There are several ways to look at this movie. As a football fan, you knew it couldn't absolutely be 100 percent realistic in that regard in order to have a broader appeal. So, forget for a second the exact picks that were given up in the deals. We can also understand that, for narrative purposes, all of the scouting that normally takes place in the weeks and months before the draft had to be condensed into one day. I think my biggest problem, football wise, was the gleeful collective realization in the Cleveland War Room that "the Jacksonville GM is an idiot. And he's NEW! Let's call him". This really didn't make Kevin Costner into some great football genius. It also didn't make much sense that the Seattle GM didn't simply call his bluff - or that other teams hadn't called Jacksonville including Seattle and Buffalo, but I digress. The moral of the story, football wise, is that Costner messed up in his original trade, and got bailed out. If three 2nds was a good deal for the sixth pick, couldn't he have made that same deal for 10 -15.

Enuff of the football for now.

While I can understand adding the death of his father for dramatic effect, his mother showing up on arguably the most important day of the year for a GM to "scatter his ashes" was totally over the top dumb. This is not a criticism of the writer.... I mean, who the heck APPROVED this? The movie already went to the trouble of establishing the mother's football bona fides in an earlier scene, yet we're supposed to believes she just shows up on "Draft Day".

The whole plot with the pregnant girlfriend ... uh, I guess that this movie was made pre-me-too, but at that time a person sleeping with a subordinate - even if consensual- was usually forbidden. I understand that they needed to add something to the story to give it a wider appeal, but having her be a team employee and worked into the mechanics of draft operations wasn't.

Garner's acting as in this seemed like she was making a capital one commercial. She smiled, titled her head and added a catchy phrase. Costner of course was pretty much "playing Costner" as well too.

In the overall review this movie not only had full use of all the NFL logos, but the commissioner, all the ESPN personalities and several former players. Heck, they even got one scene bit roles from two pretty strong actors in Sam Elliot and Rosanna Arquette. Yet, the best they could do is this?

For those that don't know, Maryland was the number one overall draft pick of the NFL draft way back when. He was a good player, had a nice career, contributed on some championship teams, but never seemingly lived up to the billing of being the top overall pick. That's kinda like this movie.

That's 15 minutes of my life I will never get back. I'm going to spend 5 more minutes though, warning people...this movie is awful.

If you are considering this movie and think it might be ok because you recognize a couple of the actors names please don't be fooled....this movie is awful.

You may watch the first scene, and think...yeah, ok isn't that convenient that the Japanese ran out of bullets at the same time as the Americans, so they all decided to fight hand-to-hand or with knives....maybe if I just suspend disbelief a little this movie won't be awful?

But then you see the lead character hitting a punching bag, which of course, he his so hard it comes off its moorings because...well, obviously he's a bad mother .....hush you mouth! Then our hero goes in to see one of those infamous WW2 "hippie generals"....you might start to question, is this movie going to be awful?

And then you'll see our hero's "bedside manner" on full display in the OR, as he settles down a wounded soldier by casually chatting him up about his hometown cuisine while another doctor saws his arm off without any anesthesia...and you'll know at that point, like I did, the movie is awful.

Just in case I didn't make myself clear, this movie is awful. Don't waste your time.

It seems like they wanted to make an action movie, and they couldn't decide what on the plot, so as a "Last Resort" they just used Die Hard as a model.

And you know, there is nothing wrong with that.

Similarities aside, this is a pretty good action movie. Jon Foo plays a former special forces soldier whose soon-to be ex- wife and daughter are taken hostage in a bank within a high rise building. In this case the robbers really are terrorist looking to get some poison gas which was placed in the vault. Foo must win the support of the police on the outside while dispatching the bad guys on the inside.

The highlight of the movie is the multiple great fighting sequences, especially one where he finds a bad guy masquerading as an escaped hostage (in a minor ode to Die Hard) and they proceed to have a hand-to-hand and knife battle. There were a few "wtf" issues like the cops simply watching hostages being executed on two occasions, a few continuity things where the good guys knew the bad guys plans without showing how, the horrible screaming of the wife as she was lowered down the side of the building and worst of all the ending where upon getting a body count of 47 dead terrorist he "knows one is missing" cause he pays attention. Along those same lines, him shooting the guy with the sniper rifle from what looked like 800 yards while there were what looked 10 swat team members 20 yards away was a little ridiculous.

Oh, I've got to add one other small ode to Die Hard - which I'd say has to be intentional as I can't imagine any action director or actor worth his salt not having seen the movie - after Foo shoots his first bad guy, as he's wearing sandals he checks the guys feet only to find them too small. He does later kill a terrorist with a bigger shoe size and takes his boots.

All-in-all, this was a very entertaining movie. I enjoyed watching it. I've seen movies with bigger name stars and bigger budgets that weren't nearly as good. I'll recommend it to my friends. It's a 6.5 and I'll for sure round it up to a 7.

I'll start off with the setup of this movie that really doubles down on the terrible messaging this story presents. Ryan Reynolds daughter's fiancé is having cold feet - because he found out that during a two-week period they were broken up, she spent "a week, haha no it was two in bed with some other guy". The payoff is "oh, but that's ok because she really loves you".

In between, we get the meat of the story via flashback. Ryan Reynolds character is likely mentally ill, although it's downplayed that he simply is a creature of habit having to write lists about everything he does. One day his wife, wanting him to drop off some videos on his way to work, changes the time on the clocks though she messes it up causing him to be 10 minutes behind, instead of 10 minutes early. This causes him to mis the ferry and be late. Since he is angry...I guess...he allows himself to get drunk at a hotel bar with an attractive woman who cons herself in to his hotel room creating a compromised position when the wife calls. He seemingly comes to his senses and leaves, drunk, only for the wife to call back and the woman to answer. If this was not enough, while driving, he runs into a stranded motorist who is in labor and drives her to the hospital - but instead of explaining the situation another misunderstanding is created. This leads to the hospital calling his wife after the child's mother leads the hospital.

At this point, his wife refuses to talk to him or hear his explanations thinking he has cheated on her.

So he goes to the doctor to get a paternity test, only to find out he's sterile - meaning his daughter ain't his. He confides this to his best friend who, come to find out is the girl's biological father because he had sex with the mother on December 19 while also courting her, before she officially got together with Reynolds on New Year's Eve.

So now Reynolds is understandably devastated - as any man would be - to find out his daughter isn't his. He becomes reckless and suicidal. They betrayal is made worse by finding out it's his best friend.

Of course his wife, Emily Mortimer, who earlier would have nothing to do with him or at least listen to his explanation when she thought he cheated, suddenly expects him to just be cool with everything.

Look, I get the point that the movie was trying to make. He obviously established a loving relationship with the child making her "his" daughter. And while in this case the child wasn't technically conceived in infidelity, it was still under false pretense. Mama obviously knew she'd had sex with multiple men, so there was a chance the child wasn't his...but her selfishness was somehow "ok" because she loved Ryan Reynolds. He only the other hand didn't "freely" choose to love his non-biological daughter because he was already subject to an emotional bond - thereby negating what the message of the movie was.

The movie also totally glosses over the potentially devastating effect this has on the child. It doesn't mention if they told her or not. When it flashes forward to the wedding, it shows that Ryan Reynolds gives her away, with his best friend/her biological father sitting next to them at the ceremony. The movie briefly touched on his feelings during the flashback - of course, I guess in this case we're supposed to ignore those along with his "rights" that he'd be the villain if he pursued....

Finally, I'll close by saying I've witnessed how a situation like this can affect a family, as my ex-wife's brother committed suicide after finding out the man who raised him wasn't his father. That was almost 25 years ago and it's had a chilling effect on my children even to this day.

Let me start off by saying that the reviewer who speaks of "the happy ending" is simply talking about the setup to the movie, that the man character visits a massage parlor that provides additional services.

Neil, our main character, is sent to the massage parlor as a joke by his mean spirited co-workers. Upon finding this out, he attempts to choke one of them. He winds up going back to the massage parlor, only to thwart a robbery that results in the death of the would-be robbers who are shot by Perla, who was servicing Neil. The two go on the run together, and see to be hitting it off. Perla relates that the robbers were somehow involved with her bosses, and that her life is now in danger. They talk of heading for Mexico when their care breaks down. They then enjoy a beautiful walk into town, and meet a nice, friendly mechanic who takes them home to stay with his family for the night...which turns out to be an interesting group of folks.

At this point, instead of continuing in a positive direction, well, Neil's issues catch up with him...and the movie goes down hill fast.

I've already warned that this post has spoilers, but here it is again. I guess I understand that Neil's jealousy and insecurities would real their ugly head, and he would turn on Perla, but the ending was simply too "quick" and out of nowhere. It's not really clear who killed Perla and kills Neil - was it the "bad guy" who was following them? One of the cops? If so, there's a huge plot hole on how they knew where to find them.

I ranked this movie a six, but it should probably be like a 5.3 because I thought up until the very end, it was pretty good.....but the ending took at least a point away.

Our erstwhile protagonist here is Mike. Early in the film, we see things about Mike to make us think that he is an OK guy, such as giving his uncle money. While he works for a disreputable brokerage firm, he seems to at least be genuine about helping a smaller investor. He has a child on the way and a significant other....maybe his wife, though there is some discrepancies in the continuity involving a scene where he is being interrogated and the cop says he's not married...

Mike is offered an opportunity by Ricky to go to California and help someone called "the dentist" to start up a new company. It's two weeks before his first child is expected, so he brings his friend along to help speed up the process. Now, in my estimation, our first glimpse of a problem comes when Mike tells his wife he is going, and his explanation seemingly focuses more on doing it for his own gratification rather than the family.

Sure enough, Mike winds up involved in a execution that's setup to look like possibly a robbery. He gets arrested after taking his friend who was shot, and later dies, to the hospital. The mob boss sends a lawyer, who explains its in his interest to plead to manslaughter and keep his mouth shut.

Six years later, he gets out of prison and meets his daughter for the first time. His family has been take care of in return for his silence...there is some uneasiness that his daughter refers to "uncle Ricky" though it was never expanded on that his wife may have been unfaithful. At this point, Mike can get on with his life.....

But that's not good enough. He's driven by revenge, and winds up returning to California and killing the dentist. He tells the big boss, Cousin, that Ricky set him up. Cousin is willing to forgive and forget about the loss of the dentist, on the condition that Mike just leave well enough alone with Rick. Mike's wife finds out that he got stabbed while killing the Dentist, and threatens to leave him.

Of course, Mike can't leave well enough alone with Ricky...even though it puts his wife and child in danger, and kills him too. This angers his wife to the point she pulls a gun on him and makes his leave.

Soon thereafter, Mike and his uncle are ambushed, which leads to his uncles death. Mikes wife tells him she and the child are gone for good, and not to look for them.

So what does Mike do? He hooks up with Cousin's assistant, and winds up killing him - but not before a warning from Cousin that this is just the beginning, and not the end. He's now clearly a target.

Sometimes, the actions of a character in a movie just aggravate you. You want to see a character who learns from their mistakes and is redeemed...but this didn't happen here. I'm not sure if the directors "point" was to make a cautionary tale or if the whole thing was just poorly executed. Either way, I give it a four as a film that had potential but was ultimately disappointing.

One of my favorite Seinfeld episodes involves dentist Tim Whatley converting to Judaism, and the priest asking Jerry if that offends him "as a Jew", to which he replies no, that it in fact offends him "as a comedian".

About My Father is a long joke about Sicilians...and while Sebastian Maniscalco might not have "converted" for the joke, well, it just kinda offends me as a comedian. There is nothing really special about this guy from a different background goes to meet his fiancée's family story. I mean, in all honesty, there is never any hint that the supposed "must be bigoted because their ancestors came over on the Mayflower" family ever look down upon our hero. About the biggest "drama" is that they want to (gasp) give him a job to help get their daughter to move closer to home and that they (gasp) wound up buying their daughter's art to help bolster her fledgling career.

There are a few comedic "misunderstandings" including Sebastian being ashamed he has taken tennis lessons, a hated haircut that turns out to be a hit, and a cooked up peacock.

Among the highlights to this movie were the acting by not only DeNiro, but Kim Cattrall and old Sledgehammer himself Dave Rasche. I didn't quite buy 50-year old Sebastian Maniscalco as the lead just getting ready to propose to his girlfriend.

In the end, however, the primary redeeming quality of this film - and what makes its worth the 90 or so minutes the viewer will invest in it - is the understanding reached between a father and his son, and the son's understanding that for all his father's perceived "faults" the most important thing is that the father loves the son unconditionally, and the son realizes all his father has done for him. This turns the score of this film that I was close to turning off after 10 minutes from a 3 to a respectable 6.

This message is somewhat personal to me as, my father happens to live in one of the gated communities that served as a location for this film in Loxley, Alabama called "Steelwood". I often joke that they put up a gate to "keep people like me out".

Ok, I say the title in jest because it loosely shares the plot device of a mean and grumpy old man who takes a young boy under his wings, showing that he's really a good person after all.

Of course, this is a much more upbeat movie with a truly happy ending.

Bill Murray is at his best simply being Billy Murray as a (blank filled in with) in this case unassuming war hero, drunkard, gambling addict who also happens to faithful visit his dementia afflicted wife in the hospital and do her laundry every week, feeds his cat gourmet food while he eats sardines and also helps his pregnant "lady of the night" friend with copays for her ultrasounds.

I've got to give a lot of credit to Melissa McCarthy in this film. Generally, when I see her name attached to a movie or TV show, I avoid it like the plague - but she was wonderful in a supporting role here as a struggling single mother. Jaden Martell as young Oliver was strong in his role next to Murray. I also thought Chris O'Dowd really stood out in his smaller role as well, while Terrance Howard and Naomi Watts turned in solid performances as well.

This was a nice, happy movie that makes you feel better watching. Yes, there were a lot of elements of sadness to it, and certainly it had a "Hollywood" ending where everyone just decided to be happy together...but sometimes we need that.