Reviews (1,127)

My introduction to The Three Musketeers was apparently The Banana Splits. Not sure how I found that out. Other than that, I only remember that I saw a movie with Tim Curry and another one with Cheech Marin and David Hasselhoff. I know I reviewed the latter for imdb but only remember that only Cheech seemed to have any talent.

I've never read the book and don't know anything about it. So I'm pretty much starting from scratch, only knowing that these heroes fought with swords.

This D'Artagnan seemed quite likable and I supported him in whatever he did, and rooted for him to succeed romantically with lady in waiting Constance. I don't even really remember which one was bald but he seemed to have more personality than the others. But one of the Musketeers had a remarkable deep voice.

Superheroes can defeat many people at once. Maybe The Rock and Schwarznegger and Van Damme. How do Musketeers do it? Just forget logic and be glad they can.

James Corden, who I didn't recognize, was the only cast member whose name I should have known. He was really good as comic relief. Was this supposed to be funny, other than him? At times, I think it was. It wasn't really necessary. But comedy helped. Lots of jokes about wearing the wrong clothing. Some language and concepts were obviously contemporary. We can have fun with that, if that's the intention.

I knew the name Milla Jovovich from some futuristic movie. I thought she was really good. If you want a "Mission: Impossible" version of classic literature. Hey, if you can have zeppelins, why not?

Freddie Fox, as a king who lacked confidence, did have beautiful hair. I suppose women didn't have hairstyles like that back then, but I prefer that more contemporary look.

Paris looked great, and Notre Dame looked magnificent. But in that one scene, given what has happened to the great cathedral, I thought NOOOOOOOO! It was almost like it all happened again.

My cable company upgraded me without my consent, so I may get to see better movies soon, and I have to figure out the listings. But for now Channels 48 and 55 are all I have time for. Good movies no one has seen, or bad movies that were in theaters.

But this isn't really a bad movie. Just one that gets a lot of criticism from people who were expecting better.

I know nothing about Paddington. Maybe I'm too old to have read his books as a child, or maybe it's just the fact that I didn't enjoy reading once I got beyond the level of the easiest books. Whatever the reason, this is my introduction to the character, and it was quite a surprise. From the start, this seemed more intelligent and more sophisticated than what I was expecting. Yes, certain things are unbelievable. Somehow the explorer Montgomery Clyde taught the bears everything they needed to know to pass as human, if they ever accepted his invitation to come to England. We just accept that somehow Paddington and his relatives learned it all, and that certain details still had to be learned. Don't ask me how Paddington knew about mail and how mail would be delivered to his aunt or, for that matter, how his aunt would have a place to go when she could no longer live alone. After all, the intelligence of Paddington and his family was said to be rare among bears. Just accept it all and go on.

It's mostly a funny movie but it has genuinely sad moments.

Ben Whishaw does a great job voicing the bear and really makes us care about him. And the animation is so well done and so seamlessly a part of the live-action world that we really believe there is a bear there. His intelligence reminds me of early episodes of "The Beverly Hillbillies". They weren't dumb. They just didn't know how things worked in the real world outside what they knew. Paddington seems surprisingly able to understand a lot of things, but what he doesn't know about toothbrushes gives us a great gag.

I was surprised to find out Hugh Booneville of "Downton Abbey" was Mr. Brown. The character is a long way from the capable supervisor of the servants, and yet he is likable in his way, even as he is quite demanding and resistant to change and risk. And yet Mr. Brown gives in and makes an effort, even dressing as a woman in a funny scene.

But it is Sally Hawkins as the kind wife that stands out among the humans. That's just my opinion.

I didn't know Nicole Kidman was the villain, and yet she is a great one, not quite on a Glenn Close/Cruella de Vil level, but more normal. Charming when she needs to be, but not truly caring.

Just a few weeks after he was first gentleman of Britain, I got to see Jim Broadbent once again, this time as a gentle old antique shop owner. He did a fine job.

Matt Lucas, whoever that is, stood out even with only a few lines as a taxi driver.

I know the name Julie Walters, and she is quite good in some scenes, the best ones at the museum.

The kids were likable. Judy was typical of kids her age, and almost always wearing headphones to block out the annoying world, eventually showing a warm side. I want to know more about that wall. What a challenge it must have been for the set decorators. Hundreds of photos and who knows what else. And Jonathan was about what one would expect from a young boy, but a little more likable and a brilliant builder of science projects.

Michael Gambon and Imelda Staunton did fine jobs as the relatives of young Paddington back in Peru. Staunton was especially good after the tragedy.

It's not clear when any of this took place. There were obviously movies with sound when Montgomery went on his expedition, and yet the scenes where his findings were rejected by the guild seemed like they took place in the 19th century based on how people were dressed. But Millicent was alive, and not that old when she was doing taxidermy at the museum. There were computers with monitors in the present, though all text was green. I remember and miss those days. There are video cameras in the security office at the museum.

But a search similar to an Internet search at the guild was done in a quite impressive and very visual way, with a vacuum system like the drive-thru line at the bank, and a Sylvester and Tweety cartoon where Tweety was transported.

The architecture of the museum was magnificent. Outside it looked like a cathedral, and inside it did too. Could it have been built as a church? I don't know.

The jungle of Peru was beautiful, and the devastation after the tragedy effective.

Slapstick physical comedy is well done but I don't know why the toilet incident had to be so overdone. How much damage was done to that home?

This is obviously a kids' movie, and yet intelligent enough for adults too. I don't want to say there is no content parents would object to, but they really shouldn't. There is an explosion that doesn't cause an injury, which is only bad if kids think explosions aren't dangerous as a result. A man is threatened and hung upside down when information is being demanded from him. And you probably know what is dumped at the petting zoo. People are shown getting drunk, but this is necessary to move the plot along, sort of. And there is some danger for Paddington but if kids know he will be all right, that's fine. And the event that leads to Paddington leaving home is tragic but needed.

There was good music. I particularly liked the band that played some sort of exotic music in the street. What I genuine hated was "Shine" by Gwen Stefani and Pharrell Williams (who did not make me "Happy") with the closing credits. That's when I took advantage of the fast forward button on the DVR (yes, I record everything).

A wonderful adventure even if you know nothing about the bear. You will want to know more, I'm sure.

I'm not a big fan of Westerns and don't know what really makes a good Western, but this had a good story and good execution. Maybe I said too much using that word. Not really funny, and yet at times you have to laugh.

Anyway, it was interesting to see this tough but beautiful woman come into town with a mysterious plan. I had no idea who she was but once I saw the name Sharon Stone at the end, I knew why she was so good in the role. I was thinking about Britt Robertson but this movie is so old she might not have even been born. Anyway, I've seen a lot of good work by this actress and I am finally getting around to seeing her in recordings I made a while back of "The Rookie: Feds". And she's tough, pretty and ... actually, I don't think I ever saw her shoot. But she could play this role.

When I think of villains you love to hate, Larry Hagman's J. R. Ewing and Michael Rosenbaum's Lex Luthor come to mind. And Gene Hackman HAS played Lex, but it has been so long since I saw him in the role, I don't remember, and I have somehow never seen "Superman". But Hackman is excellent. You have to hate a man that is so evil, and yet he is so likable in his way. And he even gets to be vulnerable. How is that possible? And no, I saw "Unforgiven" a very long time ago. Don't really remember.

Leonardo diCaprio before "Titanic"! Actually, he was so good in "What's Eating Gilbert Grape?" that it was obvious he would be going places. That was a very different role. Here, he is so good at being cocky and confident without any sense of vulnerability. Perhaps some range would have been nice, but what he did, he did very well and showed he had the potential to be one of the great actors of our time.

I've heard of Russell Crowe and heard that he is a very good actor, though he somehow didn't stand out to me. Knowing who he is now, I would ay he did a good job and I just couldn't appreciate it at the time.

Pat Hingle is appealing as the bartender. I kept thinking I know him but why? And his daughter is adorable and kind.

Several other gunfighters showed a lot of confidence and stood out. The black man stood out the most to me.

I didn't recognize Gary Sinise in the flashbacks but it was such a good scene with his young daughter, even if it was terrible.

It was stated no one is to shoot until the clock chimes. No chimes were ever heard, at least not on Channel 55. But the camera focuses for a long time on that clock, and the hand finally moving --that's suspense.

And I don't want to give away the ending, but WOW!

Nice Mariachi music was played at times. I know that's what it was because the word kept showing up in the credits.

Kids shouldn't see this. The trauma this one poor girl experienced is hard to watch. And these people have the worst morals. On broadcast TV, some details might have been missing.

Is it a great Western? Probably not. But it's good for what it is.

I didn't bother to read the description and I didn't know how it ended, so my experience may have been different from that of most people. I was also very confused by the ending until I read a description of it. I have a hard time telling people apart if they look alike, so I was totally misled--and disappointed. But the news footage used told me all of this was real. Or at least based on something that really happened.

Still, the process is what is important here. The people trying to help John did quite a good job. Susie had a wonderful attitude, but Aaron was needed for the long term. I thought maybe because of Aaron's lack of faith, he would get his faith back, and maybe he did. I have read, though, that he wasn't a real person. The inclusion of a faith based message was positive, and it wasn't the kind of pushy message sometimes seen in inspirational movies. In fact, I don't recall anything that would have been specific to Mormons.

Chadwick Hopson did a good job but didn't challenge us any more than was necessary. Having read other imdb reviews, I can say I'm glad some ideas presented in those are not what I would have wanted to see. I can only hope it was the camera and not the actor that was upside down, even if the scenes didn't last all that long.

Alexis Johnson did a great job, both in the present as the concerned wife and in the past in flashbacks as the perky and intelligent girlfriend. Many of her scenes had no dialogue but they were the nice scenes which the movie desperately needed.

The movie left out some details. More flashbacks might have been nice instead of so much of a focus on inside the cave. Also, it was not possible to hear any of what was going on above as Aaron and John were alone. And very little of the process of trying to rescue John was shown.

I'm not sure why it took me so long to watch this. I think the baby being born at the beginning confused me and made me think I was watching a different movie, so I waited. It's a good thing I didn't delete this from the DVR because if I had read the description, I would have realized it wasn't that movie.

And here is an amazing coincidence: on a night when I realized I had some movies to watch that I hadn't gotten around to seeing, I also had a list of episodes of a series that I had been reluctant to watch. The next one up was a Thanksgiving episode! And for these people it was also a terrible Thanksgiving. Sacrifices had to be made, but eventually the celebration happened.

I didn't care for the music, but I think people would enjoy the classic-style alternative rock sound when there were songs with lyrics.

I noticed this movie was rated TV-PG with no content indicators and it was a family movie with nothing objectionable, except for being scary. I think it would be fine for older kids.

Not great, but for what it was, I guess it was good.

I was not seeing Meryl Streep. I was seeing Margaret Thatcher. Regardless of how one feels about the prime minister, all the scenes with Streep were amazing. Not just her performance, but how they made her look just like the woman. Politically, I would likely be opposed to her policies, but one can be entertained and I assume educated by this film. Some fine speeches, and attitude and determination that got this woman to high office. And did they show Streep dancing with Reagan? Amazing work!

But too much time was spent on her later years. As much as I enjoyed her conversations with Denis who wasn't there (and Jim Broadbent was great), more time should have been spent on Thatcher's years as a politician. Very little time was spent on the years between college and election to Parliament. And of course they kept jumping back and forth, and I don't even think the flashbacks were done in order.

And while the uppity attitude of the men in government was shown effectively, I don't know that anyone stood out or did all that well. It all sounds good with the accents, but as I read other reviews I realized maybe it wasn't all that great.

I felt like I learned more about Thatcher and her policies but it didn't seem like enough time was spent on her career.

There was just enough comedy to make me happy even if this wasn't supposed to be a comedy.

Most of the music was good (she liked Rodgers & Hammerstein and so do I) but of course they just had to have loud garbage in some scenes, mainly those with protests. And a ringtone on a cellphone in the present. Terrible! Why are people so inconsiderate?

I'm curious how the V-chip rating had an S. What sex? Language maybe, and lots of violence, and there was a V. I wouldn't recommend this to yound children but what I saw asn't too bad.

Good, but not great.

I'm not familiar with Jason Statham but I think I've heard the name. I would say he did a pretty good job, although I kept imagining Dwayne Johnson in the role. Bruce Willis would be another possibility if he didn't have to be a cage fighter. One has to accept that killing is okay if it's bad guys and advances the effort to do good. And that rules have to be broken because nearly everyone is corrupt.

It took a while, but I suspected there would be a connection between the two stories. The scenes with Chinese seemed quite well done, and Catherine Chang was at her best in those scenes. The little girl's intelligence was amazing. I didn't find her that appealing when she spoke English but I guess she did an okay job. What I liked best was how Luke made such an effort to take care of Mei and to search for her when he lost touch with her.

Bad guy or not, James Hong is always appealing.

Of course there were exciting car chases and chases on foot. The violence to me was kind of excessive but where I saw this movie, nearly all blood was blurry. And in the real world, one hopes there will never be so many incidents in public places. I found myself wondering what it was like to be an extra in those situations. It would take a certain degree of talent even to have a nonspeaking role there. Though I did notice an incredible number of stunt players in the credits.

The Chinese businesses, exteriors and sets looked amazing. Some of that had to be real and not just for the movie.

I lost touch with which bad guys were which, but of course some spoke Chinese and some had Russian accents. Anyone who fit neither category was a corrupt cop or government official. But it seemed just about everyone was bad.

Not the best thriller, but because of the substitute father doing all he could for the girl, I suppose it was worthwhile.

So my experience with the "Hunger Games" series is as follows: It took me several years to finally see the first one after I somehow missed seeing it the first time it was on NBC. A very dark world but Woody Harrelson and Elizabeth Banks and the nutty TV hosts helped make it tolerable. I also visited a set where a few scenes were filmed, but it was closed the first time, and the second time I was late for the tour, which was the only way I would be allowed on the property. The tour leader's attitude about my just showing up definitely did not make me feel good about seeing any more movies in this series.

I checked into my motel room, aware this movie was going to be on. It took a while to unload the car but I don't think I missed anything significant. With commercials included, the movie had been on for 30 minutes. The set I visited may not have been a part of this movie.

The dark world of the first movie had just gotten a lot darker and I didn't know how I could stand it. But as the next competition was introduced it started getting interesting and I was no longer thinking about the violence and poverty and other extreme problems. The lighter moments soon came and Woody and Elizabeth were back, both making me feel so much better. The wacky TV presentation didn't quite live up to the extravaganza of the original, but it was at least lighter. Some of the competitors were enjoyable characters, and things didn't seem so bad, even though only one person was supposed to survive to the end. I liked seeing characters work together and be friends.

I won't say I really enjoyed it, but I liked it at times. Katniss is a girl next door more than a hero, and even vulnerable. Jennifer Lawrence did a fine job showing quite a range.

It took me a while to realize one girl I liked was Katniss' sister, now older. I wasn't clear about what was going on a lot of the time.

Still, this movie didn't seem overly long and it wasn't progressing as it needed to. AMC's decision ... well, I'll have more to say about that. Let's just say I knew there was another one in the series and maybe that was supposed to be a continuation. I was enjoying this enough and anticipating a logical conclusion.

Well, if a movie that has a natural ending is a flat, straight road, this movie's final scenes were Sleepy Hollow Road in the resort town where I spent time last week.

It was clear the movie to follow would have to deal with unresolved problems. Even though it was to last until midnight, I intended to watch some of it. You won't see my review because while it did address what had not given this movie a real ending, it was too dark and horrible for me to stick with it even until a normal bedtime.

I don't know what AMC was thinking. Almost no one in the Eastern U. S. could be expected to keep watching on a weeknight. It was a marathon of all four movies, with the last starting at midnight. Still, no one could have anticipated the death of Donald Sutherland, and it now seems quite appropriate that AMC picked this week for the event. He did a fine job in this movie as one of the leading villains. I just hated him because he was so evil. I've liked him in many other roles, though.

I'm not a teenage girl and don't know how females can stand something this dark and violent. Still, I saw every episode of The CW's "The 100". I guess there's even something in this type of movie for me.

I've seen several movies like this. These guys were a lot dumber than the Ocean's Eleven team (later version) but all the various government agencies, banks, porn film producers and so on manage to work together to pull off something quite complicated, even if morons are doing the actual work. So many different processes had to be coordinated, or maybe they didn't. Oh, yes, and there is a Black activist.

And how much of it was true? I don't guess it matters. Even the cops didn't seem to be too bright at times, and we don't want that.

A lot of actors seemed to be giving good performances, or maybe it's just that they were British and had those sophisticated accents. Our heroes were Cockney, but maybe they were good too.

I knew the name Saffron Burrows but didn't know who she was until I saw a cast list after I had started watching. She is gorgeous and intelligent, in contrast to her co-conspirators.

I have difficulty telling people apart when I don't really know the, so I lost track of who was part of what operation and in some cases more than one. I just know there were a bunch of young men in suits, and a bunch of old men in suits.

While pretty much no one could be trusted, I felt Det. Roy Given was one of the good ones, and I was right to feel that way. At least that's what someone said. So much was going on I'm not sure whether he remained honest and upright until the end. Just something about him.

Of course this was mostly funny, and there were enjoyable moments as those investigating began to close in. But something always went wrong for those who were supposed to catch the bad guys. Who for us weren't really the bad guys because I think we're supposed to root for them.

One of the funniest things was the cops going to what seemed like every bank in London.

Things kept going wrong for our heroes too, and over time, it appeared they wouldn't get away with it. Even now I'm not sure whether they did.

And then it got violent. More so than I would have been happy with.

And what were those photos? I had to rely on what people were saying, because on TV nothing could be seen.

A lot of language had to be cleaned up as well.

We had a couple of scenes with cute kids, but don't let kids that age watch.

Overall, I think this was enjoyable.

I only wear Converse Chuck Taylors. Low tops. I have about as many shoes as Imelda Marcos. Okay, not really. And I did give in and buy Reeboks a few years ago when I needed something I could wear in the rain, and leather Converse weren't doing the job. I have several pairs of old dress shoes but hardly ever wear them. I didn't even know what Air Jordans looked like until COVID made it possible for me to watch a great documentary series about Michael Jordan for free on ABC. Oh, yeah, and I don't even care about sports.

I still enjoyed this movie. Most of it. Whether the story was true or not, I felt like I learned a lot, even if parts weren't true (they generally aren't in these movies).

It's hard to imagine how a lot of discussion of numbers will appeal to anyone but accountants, but somehow it works. And then there's the process of developing a shoe, which should only appeal to engineering types.

Matt Damon gave a fine performance as a guy we could easily like. Not quite Oscar worthy, though he did give an Oscar speech, and by that I mean he had a scene that one might expect to see as the person's Oscar clip. Sonny sort of lacked confidence and he was kind of a loser but he had determination that allowed him to persevere and get the job done. We know he must have because Air Jordans became so popular, but it was exciting to watch how Nike got to where they were, since the odds we against them from start to finish. It's why people watch "Columbo" and "Elsbeth". And of course Sonny's job was on the line and he was constantly close to losing it. I do wonder how in the 1980s he could get away with "Casual Friday" even in the big meeting. Everyone else dressed up.

Jason Bateman I know mainly as a funny kid. But I watched how he had to mature quickly after the death of his TV mom. I haven't seen him that much in adult roles, but he is obviously an adult now. Here, also somewhat lacking in confidence and annoyed by those who can't get the job done.

Ben Affleck was appropriately quirky as the big boss. While he was pushing for something big to happen, he didn't seem to care quite as much as those under him but he was already rich and not really in danger of losing it all. He was willing to take a risk. And if that hadn't been the case, maybe no one would have listened to Sonny.

Chris Tucker had a great personality and I have to assume it was based on how his character was in real life. I kind of felt guilty in this politically correct era enjoying an attitude that came across as if he was working on the plantation.

You don't mess with Viola Davis. If anyone deserved awards it was her. She knew what Michael needed and she could get it. And she seemed to know what we know now but no one could have known then.

I don't have a problem with Michael being mostly missing. We've heard quite enough from him. Focus more on the others.

North Carolina was a beautiful place and they got the sounds of nature right. I go to Myrtle Beach every year and don't really see what Wilmington looked like here, but it looked great. I suspect where I go, hurricanes won't allow tall trees like Mrs. Jordan said had been there for hundreds of years. Brookgreen Gardens is one of the places in the Myrtle Beach area where I occasionally visit that has a similar appearance.

I enjoyed scenes from the 80s reminding me of things I enjoyed, but not necessarily the music. The 80s were, in my opinion, a terrible decade for music. In fact, things seem to have gotten worse since then but 80s music was so bad. There were exceptions. I was disappointed the song with "Bow wow wow" in the lyrics ended so fast. And somehow I don't find "Money for Nothing" unpleasant even with the guitar solo. Good 80s music (in my opinion) existed but doesn't fit, so I guess it wasn't used for that reason.

A good movie even if you don't actually like sports.

I didn't bother to find out what this movie was about, but it had some interesting details, even if was mostly boring. That's not to say it didn't have value, but it's more for people who go to poetry readings and criticize anything "commercial" than people who want to be entertained. If you don't want to be depressed, don't bother. If you want action or laughs, not much to be found here.

Of course, if anyone should have won an Oscar it was Willem Dafoe. He not only looked like Van Gogh but made us believe he WAS what Van Gogh should have been like.

Other fine performances came from Mads Mikkelson as the priest and Rupert Friend as Theo Van Gogh. Oscar Isaac as Gauguin was a much-needed voice of reason who had his own problems but at least seemed more stable than his friend. There was another good performance from a man playing an asylum patient but I'm not sure who that was. Perhaps Niels Arestrup, the "madman". And Lolita Chammah was the reluctant subject of one art work, or would have been. I thought she was quite patient with him considering his weirdness (that's before I even knew who was doing something we might consider weird.

A lot of nice scenes took place "in nature" as Van Gogh called it. Pretty to look at, but not much was happening. And sometimes things turned blue or yellow. I guess this was intended to convey Van Gogh's disturbed state of mind. One scene was even in black and white as the artist drew in black and white. In a comic strip, that might have been a joke.

There were discussions of the nature of art. I want art to look like something and don't really care about interpretation or visions. Some people in this movie agreed with that.

Excellent work by the artists, especially the black and white drawings. I know next to nothing about the work of Van Gogh but I guess everyone has seen "Starry Night". I have more an appreciation for more realistic work. But it all looked good.

I remember deciding not to watch a Kirk Douglas movie because I wasn't ready for something like that. Now I would be. And The CW showed a series on the life of Da Vinci. So I was somewhat more ready for this than I would have been.

This was more of a challenge and an educational experience than entertainment for me. But it was worthwhile, I suppose.

The first couple of scenes with Bailey Spry were so good I was disappointed when I later realized the second pretty girl was not Annie, but just sort of looked like her.

But Maika Monroe was good too. Not to mention quite good looking, and she isn't wearing a lot most of the time. I was going to say she is quite good at underwater gymnastics, but there was a stunt person for her. But that person is really amazing to watch.

Other really good characters included Jay's sister Kelly who was so caring (and eventually showed off her body too) and Paul, who was slightly nerdy but quite likable. And then there was Yara who was attractive but quirky.

There is a high level of tension a lot of the time, but there are plenty of perfectly normal scenes to enjoy and even occasional humor.

I can't say much about the violence. A lot of edits had been made to the movie before I saw it on TV. Porn magazines and naked versions of "It" were blurry.

I can't even begin to describe what made this film seem well done. There are certain details about the camera work and the scenery that might work on some different level than a casual viewer would expect.

I can't quite explain what made it work when Jay was pushed around in a chair. The camera was positioned so it moved as the chair moved, and there was something about Jay's face when the chair started moving.

And in that scene, has there ever been anything like that parking garage? When seen from the outside it is hideously ugly but remarkably huge. The place is falling apart and I hope it was torn down soon after that, but I wonder how they could feel safe filming there.

Rundown neighborhoods made me think of Detroit for some reason. Maybe that's because I've seen news reports that show Detroit as one of the worst cities for having neighborhoods like that. The kids lived in such a nice area but they kept having to go into these parts of the city that were just left to decay. I didn't consider where this place might be until someone said "Eight Mile" and I remembered that was an album and movie by Eminem who was from Detroit. And there were also scenes in industrial looking areas. Quite effective.

And yet there were plenty of rural scenes on beaches or in wooded areas. Knowing what I know now, apparently Lake Huron? Peaceful and nice, but never for long.

Also effective was what some people would call music. Disasterpeace does describe it very well. Not music I would enjoy listening to but it works.

On the subject of music, I don't know why a movie theater would have an organ but that was nice. I started to say in this day and age but with cars that were so old, I don't know when it was taking place. Except for what is called a compact and contains makeup, I didn't see any electronic devices, which is unusual for teens in the 21st century. But movie theaters had not needed organs for nearly 100 years when this was made.

I knew right away when I saw those first scenes I wanted to see this, and halfway through I was not wanting it to end. That's a good sign.

There was something about how this movie started that told me in spite of it being about vampires, I would like it. Okay, I still didn't like it that much, but Rose was not only pretty but quite likable with attitude and determination. I sort of enjoyed her various storylines and her attempts to deal with acts of hate and solving the mystery of a favorite teacher. Lissa was somewhat appealing but not that great. However, later on a bubbly and quirky character was introduced who was even more appealing, in her way. I finally found out it was Haley from "Modern Family" but she was a very different character. When she went to the dance, she was really pretty. The performance took on a new dimension later which didn't make me happy.

Stunt fighting was quite interesting, with what might have been different styles of martial arts.

The listing that came with my DVR didn't call this a comedy. It was funny enough at times (especially with Rose's attitude), but I would tend to agree that it needed more humor for comedy to be included as a genre.

There were other male teen characters who were somewhat appealing but no one stood out to me that much. With the accents, so many acting performances seemed good. I will say the ultimate mean girl Mia was very unpleasant and I would say not well acted. Not pretty either.

Oscar the cat was cute but not used enough, and I won't say why but he really wasn't as much a part of the movie as I would have liked.

What an elegant style of architecture. Reminded me of Duke University. The buildings all looked so good, inside and out. And great looking stained glass.

As one would expect for a movie for teen girls, the music was terrible in my opinion. Probably the worst song of all came during the first half of the credits, and assuming the songs in the credits were listed in the order they were played, the band was Chvrches. I did hear lyrics that matched the title, so I'm sure I'm right. The quality of the song, for those who think alternative rock is actually quality music, did seem superior to the pop garbage teen girls tend to like. But I personally found it quite unpleasant.

Family friendly? I think not. Some violence, some of it quite disturbing, and occasional stereotypical vampire behavior. Good makeup, I guess. Some sexual content too. I don't even want to know what the boys were doing in that one scene.

Do I recommend it? Well, don't go into it with high expectations.

This isn't the sort of movie I would choose to watch, and I can't honestly say I was rewarded. I liked Julio well enough, and Beverly was certainly pleasant as well as pretty. Mr. Johnson was sufficiently creepy but not really a bad person. Mrs. Grey was nasty so something that happens should make people happy, I tried to like Phil, but he had some difficult scenes and sometimes I thought he went overboard.

The whole building is creepy on several levels, if that's what you like. Some areas look as nice as if they were new, but after all, parts of the building are luxury apartments. Those who can't afford those apartments ... well, those aren't so nice. One floor doesn't seem to have any lights other than the red light used when developing film, also used when the elevator is stuck. And Walter's apartment is full of religious imagery. Sound effects, scary music, and some kind of chanting add to the atmosphere.

And there is the obligatory exciting ending. But a number of developments you might not expect.

If there is any reason to praise the movie, it's the young actress who plays the little girl. I can't say just why she is so good without giving something away you really don't want to know, but she comes across in a way that makes me think she could have played Wednesday Addams, except in a more friendly way than that.

And of course there is Val Kilmer. I'm not that familiar with him but I recently saw another movie where his cancer affected his ability to speak, and that added something to the other movie, as well as this one. This man is beyond scary.

Another good thing about the movie is the use of a good song in one scene. It's not that often music that good is played in a movie.

Should children watch this? No, they might get nightmares.

Can I recommend this? I'm no expert on how to tell if a thriller/horror film is good. Maybe. But definitely not a classic.

Okay, it's not the best rom-com ever, but it's different. They all have something distinctive even if they fit a formula. And who wants realism? We're here to get away from reality.

What is it people have against J-Lo? So she is beautiful. That doesn't mean she can't act. I thought she was good in "Gigli"! I found her appealing enough, and I don't just mean good-looking. She looks like she is having a good time, when she is. Though it must be stated she has a beautiful face and an amazing body, which she is willing to show off as much as possible. One scene shows her from the back wearing as little as TV will allow, and maybe there is more I didn't see because of editing, such as another scene where she is facing the camera. Even when she is supposed to be pregnant, her legs still look great, and she is amazingly limber in the doctor's office before the procedure that makes her pregnant. Not sure why she covers her legs at the gym. And even with less makeup, she still has a beautiful face. There is one scene where she is showing photos to her boyfriend, and it's not really like acting. There's just something genuine about her in that scene.

Enough about J-Lo. I'm not familiar with Alex O'Loughlin but he is also quite appealing. Part of that is that he looks like Michael Rosenbaum, the most likable villain I can ever recall other than J. R. Ewing. But it's not him. And Stan is a good guy.

Linda Lavin is wonderful as Nana. It's good to see her playing a positive character once again, because she has played a lot of nasty old women in recent years. Also, Nana doesn't seem old. Her friends are still quite active. Others have some trouble getting around but that's fine.

That's more than we can say about Tom Bosley (Howard Cunningham and Father Dowling to me), but he is likable even if he is obviously old. I sure would like to have seen more of him in other productions, even at that age and not in the best of health.

Robert Klein is so good as the doctor. I really liked him.

Anthony Anderson has a couple of good scenes as a frustrated father who isn't really warning Stan to get out while he can, because occasionally there are good times. The censor did get to the s-word (I think) but it's hard to tell. What father says that, multiple times, in front of his young son who has ... picked it up from the sandbox? But if you can accept such a disgusting joke, somehow the word needs to be there. Multiple times. The kid is good too.

Michaela Watkins makes a good best friend. She has one standout scene but it's the first one, where she seems to hate her kids. Other than that, she's just there. Those kids never appear again. Maybe one. I don't remember.

Melissa McCarthy is a quirky support group leader. One of these overly positive types. I'm not sure whether to use the word hippie.

And about that group. I'm not crazy about some of its members. There are the stereotype lesbians, though I don't think they speak. I shouldn't mention the outtakes yet, but I have to because there's one unpleasant scene that was apparently left out of the movie. And yet according to some imdb user reviews, that scene was in the movie, so maybe it didn't make it to TV. Just as well. If you're lucky, you won't see the woman giving birth in the water except with the credits.

There is a cute and helpful baby store employee who has a couple of good scenes.

Now let me say you have to stay for the outtakes at the end. They are funny. I don't like dogs and particularly not this one, but they have to try over and over to get the dog to walk up a ramp into ... well, I don't know what to call it. A fancy doghouse, maybe? It has a bed and looks like where a dog would go when indoors.

Some music I liked and some I didn't. I don't like J-Lo as a singer or others performing in the same style. Or the type music I believe her fans like. Some wedding music was familiar but performed in a different style then the best-known recording. No, it's not who you think getting married.

Should kids watch this? No! There is almost nothing, not even the scene with the kid at the playground, that kids should see.

If you can't find a great rom-com, this can be your back-up plan.

This is what I get for not bothering to find out what a movie is about before deciding to record a movie shown on Channel 48. The title "Cell" seemed familiar for some reason and I concluded it would be an entertaining movie about technology. Well, it was, sort of.

Okay, Stephen King wrote the book, according to the opening credits. I don't read books, and I'm not a fan of horror though Stephen King movies are said to be better than the average horror film. I've seen some of them (some apparently really good), and a TV series he was even in. It was a big shock to find out how bad things got so quickly. And the movie's theme tells me King must hate cell phones and technology and wants to make them the villain.

But Samuel L. Jackson is there to save the day! Well, not really, but he is there and as long as he is around, everything will be all right, eventually, for at least someone. Not everyone will survive but it's not for Jackson's lack of trying. The important thing is that he is always entertaining and even has some funny lines. Yes, there is humor here. Example: A Black man with a crowbar about to face a Second Amendment extremist. Well, here, take a baseball bat instead. Oh, yeah, that improves things.

Stacy Keach has the other really good performance. Yes, I said the other. As the headmaster of an exclusive looking boys' school (or are there girls who fled or were "converted"?), he offers his theories for what is happening and even makes it sound positive. He is gracious to his guests.

I know the name John Cusack and have seen some of his movies. I just don't remember anything about what I have seen except that I remember him being good. I suppose he is serviceable here. I at least like the character and want him to get what he wants. Still, he seems to have created the movie's villain as a comic book artist. Is he imagining everything? Or did he cause it all? And one character I thought was the villain ... it's not him. Who it is ... well, that's awful.

Clark Sarullo (that's a woman's name) is pretty and has a brief good scene as Clay's wife, and Ethan Andrew Casto also has his brief scenes as the son. And scenes where we hear him if we don't see him.

In my opinion, the creepy creatures did quite well. Just extras looking and sounding weird? There were too many of them to audition them all, but perhaps they did and I thought the results were good. I found them plenty scary, but I find movies scary that some people don't. And then there are a couple of scenes where there are so many they must be CGI. Effective, I believe.

Towers, both cell and electric transmission, look really good. Several locations were chosen with a lot of transmission lines, with different tower designs. Didn't another King production use them?

There is one really fun scene in what I thought was a restaurant but I keep seeing it referred to as a bar. Much needed when things are so negative.

And, as one might expect, there is a survivalist. I guess Anthony Reynolds, whoever that is, was good in the role.

Whatever is happening, it is never really explained, and what happened is widespread. That's one of the scariest parts.

Immediately, there is a terrifying moral dilemma. All these weirdos must die! Is that really the case? Well, the decision must be made over and over.

The weather changes quickly. First it is snowing, then it is really snowing and everything is covered, and then it never snowed at all. Maybe more time passed and more distance was traveled than we realized. We only see what is essential. Some imdb reviews pointed out a lot of stuff was missing. Yeah, I guess so. What can you do in the time you are given?

It seemed like there couldn't be a happy ending. What I saw may have been one, but I saw a description of the movie where something very different happened. One imdb review said the reviewer checked behind the credits. Did I stop the recording too soon? I did stop where I thought the credits stopped. I've heard of movies continuing after that. I'd rather assume what I saw was the end.

Where was the sex? The v-chip rating had an S. Maybe that means the content was so bad they had to add as many letters as possible. I think it goes without saying kids shouldn't watch this until they're mature enough.

Was it any good? Not a classic, I'm sure. Not one of King's memorable movies.

Of course, with a title like "Brothers", we know the movie will surely be about both brothers, and the fact one of them is said to be dead doesn't make sense. At first. I sure wasn't prepared for what happened next to Sam, and it was really hard to watch, even if it wasn't that graphic. This was balanced by an almost normal life back at home, with some humorous moments. In fact, it was a little too normal. After some time had passed, it looked like everyone was coping quite well. Did they even miss Sam? Well, the situation is not simple at all and what happens later is hard to watch but to be expected. And I wondered how it could end. There was almost an ending that we wouldn't have liked, and the movie didn't so much end as stop. Yes, this happened. So what comes next? We can only wonder, but for now, this is something we can live with.

The attitudes of the enemy are understandable, and the actors are effective, but there are a number of moral questions. There isn't really an attempt to resolve these, but survival is the objective.

Tobey Maguire does an amazing job and, yes, I read some comparisons to his Danish counterpart. That doesn't matter as this is the movie I saw. Though he did seem kind of young to be a captain. A fine, upstanding marine and family man, dedicated to his country and serving with honor, and determined not to do anything wrong, no matter what. Until he can't. And then, it's a matter of coping.

Jake Gyllenhaal offers a contrast, a man who has made mistakes and is still somewhat of a loser who will never please his demanding father. But his evolution is a pleasure to watch, even if it appears something unfortunate will happen as he is able to live life and improve himself. Then he really shows what he is capable of.

Natalie Portman is a strong mother who has to hold it together and manages quite well. A little too well, as I have said. And then she has more challenges when things change.

Bailee Madison is quite talented for such a young girl. I think I have heard the name, and no wonder. While most of what she and her onscreen sister do is fun or funny and light-hearted, she has some real challenges and meets them. The other young actress is quite appealing.

Sam Shepard is a father whose expectations are too high, but even he shows flaws and eventually he shows a more accepting side.

Mare Winningham gives her usual good performance. She is a little more caring and logical.

Patrick John Flueger is the other POW in Afghanistan. It's hard to watch what he goes through. And Carey Mulligan is his wife back home, who may have to face an unthinkable truth. She does okay but we know the truth and have to wonder what it will be like if she learns what she won't want to know.

And it was nice to see Ethan Suplee, who I know best in a different brother role, where both brothers were losers but he was the bigger loser. Here, his role is much needed comic relief, though he's not the funniest one of the group. I don't know which of the "three amigos" that was, but at home, we needed normal life.

I was grateful to see this cleaned up for TV, but I wouldn't recommend this at all to kids the age of those shown in the movie. If it was possible to see the movie with all the bad parts cut out, that might be a different matter, because there were plenty of kid-friendly scenes.

The music in this movie wasn't my taste at all. Maybe people who like war movies would enjoy these styles of music.

It's a worthwhile effort if you can deal with what can be quite hard to watch.

Ever since her great sitcom about having a baby, I have wanted to see Jennifer Westfeldt whenever she was in something. I saw her in another movie but it has been a while, but my memory of how much I liked her in the TV comedy endures. Here, she wrote, directed, and even acted. She is appealing enough, and while she says she isn't pretty enough ... well, compared to Megan Fox maybe not but her hair always looks perfect, even when she is struggling with her baby. Okay, maybe her hair does look a mess in some scenes, but she looks good most of the time. Not your ideal romantic comedy female lead, but this isn't your average romantic comedy. In fact, it's not really romantic, and it's not always a comedy. I like her enough even if the concept seems weird.

And the movie takes us on an emotional roller coaster, which we may not want to go on. We're somewhat more challenged than in a typical movie. But my perception is that it's worth it because it's a quality production that is not always meant to be liked or ideal.

Adam Scott was appealing as well, and even if Jason's connection with Julie was weird, there was something genuine about it. I don't want to explain or justify the ending, but I guess it's something we would want. I don't see him as a selfish brat like some might.

I'm not crazy about Maya Rudolph but she has always been good in whatever she did. Here it appears she will always be angry and a man who isn't doing his share. But that's not always the case and she's also caring. I don't really like her. I'm not supposed to.

I didn't really notice the other husbands. Jon Hamm, who I didn't really know (the name is familiar), stood out more later in a good scene where he was angry, and then later when he was apologetic.

I don't know Edward Burns but it just so happens I've been watching Ike Barinholtz on "Jeopardy". All I can say is he looks like Barinholtz, and other than that he's pleasant but not someone I'm enthusiastic about. A good man in real life but no fun in a movie.

Megan Fox ... wow. She could have been a spoiled brat but she wasn't. And she looks great. That's enough, right? I'm a straight man and do like rom-coms, but the girl has to be pretty. Okay, she's not the lead. She isn't wearing much in some scenes, and she even likes video games (I don't, but it means she's fun).

I found Kristen Wiig a big disappointment. She's always good, but here she's rarely used. Mostly she's just angry and cries, and she was simply wasted. But her hair always looked great.

Beautiful fall leaves, and several scenes with snow.

I was very grateful to have seen this on TV. While certain frank sexual humor was left in, a lot was left out. I could sort of tell that one word had been changed, and I couldn't believe the word it must have been belonged in the movie. I am very glad a line mentioned in several user reviews didn't make it into the version I watched. That would have been awful. In addition to sexual humor, there is potty humor. Literally. Why would anyone DO this online?

Some music was good, but most was bad in my opinion. Looking at the credits some people called The 88 were a good example of what I found bad. The song I was hearing at the time had lyrics that matched the last one in the credits and the last one in the movie, so I know it was them. I hate to say anything bad about James Brown, but no, don't play a song like that at Christmas. It has appropriate, religious lyrics (though the leads hated organized religion) but no, I don't want music like that at Christmas.

If you're a woman, and you're willing to be made uncomfortable and go outside the stereotype, maybe you'll like this.

First of all, I never stopped being the same age as these kids, except for the fact that as much time has passed since I was born as had passed for the clueless grandmother who chaperoned the party (what was even the point?) . Somehow I can find a movie like this entertaining. It won't win any awards except for how bad it is, but it's possible that these are realistic experiences for teens at the time this was made. I didn't have a typical high school experience but I've seen TV and movies.

With a title like "LOL" I immediately assumed a comedy where people communicate by text with abbreviations. That is actually what the movie is about. It's not always a comedy, but it's funny enough. And why did Lola say people called her "LOL" when they never did, not even in the many texts?

I actually liked "Hannah Montana" despite being way outside its target audience. I'm just sorry ABC couldn't bother to put more than one season on Saturday morning. I don't think Miley Cyrus is a bad actress and she has this great speaking voice. I would have been happier if she was happier, but she had to go through this range of emotions. Kind of a brat but likable enough. Maybe she deserved more punishment but ...

I have liked Demi Moore in a number of movies. I didn't recognize her but this was a mom in over her head. She couldn't seem to get through to her daughter half the time and just gave in when she should have stood firm. She couldn't resist the urge to get back with her ex-husband when she had needs. And yet somehow she was so loving. Maybe a little too loving. It didn't seem realistic for her to be so close to this girl in some scenes. A "Gilmore Girls" type relationship seems possible when there aren't any more kids, but in many of the scenes it wasn't like that. Oh, wait, I've seen this. It's called "Spencer Sisters". I can't really say whether Moore's acting was any good, but this is a flawed mom. Oh, yeah, and explain to me the nice apartment and "clients" when this woman isn't any more capable than this.

I don't know who Ashley Hinshaw is but she is pretty and quite likable, somehow familiar, and someone I'd like to see more of. Emily is basically a good girl but a little too adventurous. I enjoyed her various storylines, including an inappropriate attraction to her math teacher (more about that later) and another relationship which will be a surprise and cause a major conflict.

Adam Sevani was a nerd who hoped to be more.

All the other teens were typical and no one stood out in any way. I will say I liked Kyle (don't know Douglas Booth) and felt bad about his strict father, who was stereotypical and overdone but had a redeeming scene which didn't really make sense. A lot of things didn't make sense unless you are competing on Penn & Teller and the writers of this movie should get a trophy from them. Except they are entertained when they are fooled. Well, Penn is.

For the guys, there is the one locker room scene with girls in their underwear, and Miley in a towel at home and wearing shorts a lot of the time (indoors only in the winter).

Three other familiar names were in this movie, but the first looked familiar and I didn't know why. I finally realized it was Marlo Thomas. WHY? She doesn't belong here. She was sort of good, but in trying to be a cool grandma she messed up bad. Not just the character. The actress. Seems like at the party the actress could have looked a little more frustrated. I did like how she interacted with her own daughter, reminding her she was once like her daughter.

And Fisher Stevens, He's always good. Well, almost. He didn't get much use here. It's a shame.

Jay Hernandez I liked, but I didn't recognize him at first. Say what you want, but I liked him as Thomas Magnum on TV.

Nora Dunn looked familiar for some reason. A strict mother to Emily, which was what Lola needed.

One mom thought her daughter was nothing but good looks and that would get her far in life, but it was all she would have.

There is a trip to France, though at least for some characters, it seems doubtful. And this has some really funny scenes, such as the extremely old-fashioned house with strict manners and creepy decorations. And terrible food. My French class went to a French restaurant and ate escargot. I knew how those girls felt and don't know how anyone ever ate those things. We had the opportunity to go to France too but I didn't.

I mentioned the math teacher. The actor could have played one of the kids. Inappropriate relationship, but not on his end. He never did anything wrong. But they called him a trig teacher. I never once saw trigonometry on the blackboard. He solved a problem which didn't look like anything I ever saw in college, much less high school. Vectors? Was the kid being tutored taking some kind of AP course? I don't think the writers knew high school math.

Regarding the music, I was surprised I didn't really dislike it. I was once surprised at how much I liked a relatively new song by Ingrid Michaelson, and when I heard her in the movie I recognized her voice somehow. The credits proved I was right, even if it was another song. I don't really like the Rolling Stones, but in a teen movie something like that sounds great. The other music wasn't so bad either. Not what I call good, but not that bad. The band in the Battle of the Bands, though, got too loud. Is that style of guitar called grunge? Seemed overdone. If you have the same taste in music as teens in 2012, I guess the band was talented. Somehow the music in this movie seemed more "serious" than what teens usually like. While I don't care for Miley Cyrus as a singer, she has a wide variety of styles in her repertoire. She didn't sing here, which may have been a shame, but I have to believe she had some influence if there was more rock than "pop".

If no one but teens can like this movie, no one younger than that should see it. Even cleaned up for TV, it pushes the limits. I suppose teens are like this, but they shouldn't be.

And I will say if you are a teenager or never stopped being one, maybe this will be fun.

I didn't watch this to be entertained, though I was. I watched it to be educated. At some point I thought the film was being overly dramatic and doubted that the events happened the way they did. What I have found is that few of those really dramatic moments even happened.

I was not watching this to see African American women experiencing discrimination and not being taken seriously (although I halfway expected women not to be taken seriously). I watched this to see strong intelligent women accomplishing a lot for the U. S. space program. And to some extent, I saw that. Maybe things didn't happen quite the way the movie says they did, but the scenes with Katherine Johnson doing the complicated math were quite effective. And I learned about a group of women called "computers" back when people hadn't yet learned to think of the word as referring to machines. I may have learned details of the specifics of discrimination and the protests that I didn't know.

Most of the scenes showing the women being treated as less than equal never happened, but if we pretend they did then they were quite well done. Maybe there was a little too much focus on what the women went through, which they may have, but not at the time depicted.

I'm not familiar with Taraji Henson but I didn't have to be. She became Katherine Johnson for me and that's all that mattered. And a great job she did. Imagine learning all that math! Maybe she had something like cue cards but that couldn't have been easy. Memorizing lines is one thing, but complex math?

I know Octavia Spencer better. The role that stands out the most for me was a nurse for troubled teens in a short-lived series. Here she inspired confidence and wouldn't let anyone stop her. Did Dorothy Vaughan really get the computer (machine) to work when no one else could? Who cares? It was great to watch. And she taught the women she "supervised" very well. At least the way this movie tells the story, the women taught those men a thing or two.

Janelle Monae was also inspiring but we didn't get to see much of what she did, and we should have.

The strikes meant CBS had to have a backup plan until scripted series were ready. As a result, I've come to see a very different Kevin Costner than the good but tough guy depicted in this movie. But the rich ranch owner was actually a good guy too. How can Costner be anything else? Here, he was threatening people but being very reasonable, with justified demands for changes that should have taken place. People were warned about him but his demanding nature was actually not scary.

And Jim Parsons did what he does so well: Playing an intelligent jerk who hates being told he's not perfect. Although I'm used to a more likable version who is at the same time quick to insult his inferiors. Here, his character doesn't really seem all that smart because Katherine Johnson seems to do his job better than he does, and that's just not right! But we know he must be good at his job in order to be one of the elite, and we just don't get to see it.

Glen Powell (interesting coincidence) made a great John Glenn.

The man Katherine ended up marrying was too nice and too good looking to be believed. Good job, though. Her kids were also likable too.

I won't give away too much but one of the final scenes will have you on the edge of your seat like with the events of Apollo 13. Amazing! And all of the scenes showing news coverage of the space program were quite effective. I will say I was expecting more, but this movie focuses on a much shorter time period than I had expected.

Great looking cars, though I would have been happier with older cop cars. Both cop cars shown (might have been the same one twice) were from several years after the events of the movie, and by that time cars didn't look quite as good.

Family friendly? I did see that the movie was edited for TV, and there's nothing too concerning in what I saw. Kids in school should see this as part of their education.

Regardless of whether it was real history, it was a fine effort.

Why was this shown in February? It's a Thanksgiving movie. But maybe one should be thankful it wasn't shown then, when only the best Thanksgiving movies should be shown.

Once I saw the cast, I thought this would be a good movie. Not really. But it had its good moments.

I don't know anything about Malin Ackerman but she is pretty enough, I suppose, and I thought she did a good job acting. Not always pleasant, but she was the voice of reason surrounded by chaos.

Kat Dennings was the other star and I'm much more familiar with her. I first became acquainted with her when she was Bob Saget's daughter, but I don't remember much about her show except I like her. And when she joined Beth Behrs in "2 Broke Girls" she was great if raunchy and snarky. Here, she showed a lot of the negativity that made her so good in the TV series, but somehow I didn't like her quite as much. Abby tried to run things but she was overwhelmed. She had her good scenes.

I know Jane Seymour best as the politically correct and family friendly old West doctor, but here she was anything but. I would say she was pretty good and not bad looking for her age. The accent bothered me (why couldn't she just be British?). And she was as raunchy as broadcast TV will allow (and maybe worse, since a lot of words were missing).

I don't care much for Aisha Tyler even though I know her from "Whose Line Is It Anyway?" I didn't like her all that much here but she had some warm and kind moments. And one that was a little too warm.

Deon Cole was the wacky ad executive on "Black-ish" whose behavior made one wonder how he kept his job. A little more logical and realistic here. But he still had some of the same personality and was open to unconventional relationships.

I didn't recognize her but I genuinely despised Chelsea Peretti as a "sha-woman". Maybe the character will appeal to enlightened vegan women who meditate and do yoga. But even if I had known she was on "Brooklyn Nine-Nine", I didn't like her there either.

Jack Donnelly is a familiar name for some reason, but I don't really know him. He did a good job and was likable enough. Straight women and gay men should know he wears nothing or almost nothing early and is shirtless through most of the holiday event.

Three lesbian women invited as potential dates for Abby all did a good job but only one was anywhere close to appealing to me personally. One had this attitude which women might like. Each did a "dating video" looking at the camera with different lighting, and so did Abby later.

I can't really say I liked the three Fairy Gaymothers, part of Abby's dream, but the performances of the three actresses were good.

Even the baby (babies) was a good actor. Though the bloopers at the end include interruptions by crying.

What might be described as music was, in my opinion, mostly terrible and the longer the movie lasted, the worse it got. Don't people that age have better taste? I did like the salsa dance music in the middle. I saw Christmas music listed in the credits but don't recall hearing any.

Family friendly? The first scene has a dominatrix using a whip. Numerous words were not heard. What was heard pushes the limits of broadcast TV. How did these people drink so much and still manage to get things done? And then there were "shrooms" which resulted in some interesting visuals. And one lesbian kiss where one of the participants was presumed straight, witnessed by a child who needs it explained.

You have to stay around for the outtakes during the closing credits. They were great.

Not consistently good, but not all bad either, and often funny.