Desperados (2020)

Director: LP
Writer(s): Ellen Rapoport
Starring: Nasim Pedrad, Anna Camp, Lamorne Morris and Sarah Burns

You know what? I always complain about how lame most “rom-coms” are, following boring formulas to a “T” while barely interjecting any original ideas of their own. I mean, technically almost every movie (and every book, piece of music, etc.) is a retread of many others - there are so many existing pieces of media that it’s impossible to create something that’s entirely unique - but cheesy rom-coms are almost unwavering in their commitment to tired tropes.

But then I forget about the other side of the equation: Rom-coms that try to be “edgy”. These are almost worse in that they still follow the same cliches of Hallmark-style crapfests, but just throw in a few extra “fucks” or maybe some heightened sexual content, for no reason. 

Desperados is a good example of the latter, but it does manage to be slightly better than other such entries thanks to a good cast who work well together, and the occasional humorous moment that lands.

Wesley (yes, she’s a girl) is a mess of a woman whose life is a series of failed relationships. She’s that prototypical “edgy” girl: Promiscuous and willing to do anything in her quest to find true love because, you know, that’s funny. In the opening, she is on a blind date with Sean (Lamorne Morris, that likable dude from "New Girl"), who instantly shuts her down when he sees just how desperate she is.

Rebounding from that, she meets Wes, a man with whom she shares an immediate attraction. She likes him so much that she even makes him wait a month before inviting him into her bedroom…and then doesn’t hear from him for five days. This leads her (and her two best friends) to get drunk and fire off a profanity-laden email in which no target is off limits…including his dead father.

But would you believe it if I told you that there was a good reason for his radio silence? Of course, right after her friends click “send”, she finally receives the call she’s been waiting for, but receives unexpected news: He was in a serious accident while traveling to Mexico and has been recuperating in a hospital. 

Once again desperate (see how much of a recurring theme this is in her life) she forces her two friends to accompany her to Mexico, with the idea that they will delete the incriminating message before he can read it. Of course, things do not go that simply. Also an “of course”: Sean happens to be there at the exact same time. Could she possibly find that the man of her dreams isn’t the one that she originally flew to Mexico for?

The comedy here is rather tired, such as a recurring joke involving a mother who thinks Wes is attracted to her 12-year-old son, and the increasingly extreme lengths Wesley will go in order to save a fledgling relationship. Yet the cast is pleasant enough together that it helps offset some of the failed humor and the obligatory fight between the self-centered Wesley and her friends when they realize their friend is so hung up on men, that she has no time to appreciate them. 

There really isn’t any form of sexual chemistry between the two eventual lovebirds - which, let’s be honest, is kind of a drag in a movie where we’re supposed to cheer for them to get together - but they do have a platonic compatibility that makes their scenes feel genuine, in a way. Maybe not the way the filmmakers - or us, as the viewers - were hoping, but it’s a small shred of authenticity in a movie otherwise surrounded by unnecessary excess.

ENTERTAINMENT RATING: 5.5/10

TRAILER

Resort to Love (2021)

Director: Steven K. Tsuchida
Writer(s): Tabi McCartney and Dana Schmalenberg
Starring: Christina Milian, Jay Pharaoh, Sinqua Walls and Tymberlee Hill

Wow, I must say that, without a single shred of a doubt, this year has been the best year we’ve ever experienced for “corn-coms'' (there has to be a term I can coin for these B-grade wannabe romance flicks). Not all the movies we’ve seen have been produced this year, but all the ones we’ve seen have had some sort of redeeming quality, and none have outright pissed us off. I’m sure I’ve just jinxed it but hey, if that’s the case, it was a good ride while it lasted.

And, surprisingly, the streak continues with Resort to Love, another Netflix-produced “rom-corn” (See? “r” and “m” together look like an “n”! No takers on that….?) starring Christina Milian, the disgraced ex-singer turned Netflix movie star. Seriously, she must get paid a fortune, because she seems to be in at least three of these every single year; no amount of money would be worth that to anyone who has a shred of dignity left in their careers.

But you know what? For all the pointed criticism I just leveled her way, she’s almost a natural when it comes to starring in these roles. I mean, I guess it could be argued that she’s basically a spin-off of the same character every single time, and standard “acting” doesn’t really apply to this throwaway romantic drivel, but she has a knack for just being inherently likable. And she isn’t afraid to make fun of herself, or to look stupid, the way some former “stars” would, which only adds to her appeal.

In this one, she plays Erica Wilson, a singer whose career is about to take off thanks to her being featured in an album from Che (pronounced “Chee” and who seems to be a spoof of Kanye West), the hottest hip-hop artist in the world. She attends a listening party of the album’s release with her best friend Amber (Tymberlee Hill, who played Phe Phe Reed in the often hilarious reality show parody “The Hotwives of Orlando”). But rather than boosting her career, Che promptly ends it, when he destroys the computer which houses the only copies of the tracks, thanks to a radio DJ leaking a song early. 

Her career isn’t the only thing that’s in dire straits: Her fiance, Jay, recently up and left her a month before their planned wedding, completely out of the blue, a traumatic event she is still reeling from. 

Depressed, Amber suggests she take a job as a resort singer on a beautiful island. Initially, Erica sees it as a downgrade, a job that’s beneath her. But eventually, she realizes she has no other offers on the table, and reluctantly accepts. 

There, she meets the perfect Caleb, who rescues her and another man from drowning after Erica attempted to rescue the man herself. Long story short, in one of those coincidences that only happens in this mindless drivel, he turns out to be Jay’s brother, and is only on the island (that’s thousands of miles away from their home in New York) for Jay’s wedding! That’s right…Erica is going to have to sing for her ex-fiance and his beau, an idea that doesn’t sit too well with her. 

Unfortunately for her, Jay’s fiance takes an immediate liking to Erica, which is obviously due to the fact that neither of them have revealed the true nature of their past relationship. Being this close to the woman who’s going to marry her ex doesn’t really help matters for her, but of course because this is a rom-com, all of her pain is played for laughs. Cue a series of hilarious misunderstandings and awkward situations!

Once again, this is another movie this year that doesn’t have a villain, and is all the merrier for it. All of the characters are likable, even Jay somehow, who comes off as more of an immature man-child afraid of commitment than a douchebag who intentionally caused her emotional harm. His jealousy over his brother’s growing closeness with his ex forms much of the movie’s backbone; is he truly in love with his fiance, or does he want to get back with the woman whose heart he destroyed?

But this is, first and foremost, a comedy. Amber provides some good quality laughs as Erica’s best friend, and the movie also gets some comedic mileage out of Claire, Erica’s French-accented boss, who is a stickler for the rules. Granted, much of the humor derives from her ridiculous accent and overacting, but it’s still funny. It’s just a shame that, once the story starts kicking in, both of their characters are relegated to just a couple of minor appearances that don’t pack the same effectiveness of their earlier scenes.

In the end, this is yet another showcase for Christina Milian to sing a few songs in between trying to find the man of her dreams. It’s almost becoming a subgenre unto itself, considering she seems to be in a growing number of them every year, and Resort to Love isn’t going to earn her any new fans. But for those that like these kind of cheesy romance movies, there’s enough here that it shouldn’t lose her any fans, either.

ENTERTAINMENT RATING: 6/10

TRAILER

No Sleep 'Til Christmas (2018)

Director: Phil Traill
Writer(s): Steve Smith and Traill
Starring: Odette Annable, Dave Annable, Charles Michael Davis and Alphonso McAuley

It’s amazing how far chemistry can take even the cheesiest of rom-coms. Take, for example, No Sleep Till Christmas, a movie that - even within the confines of the corny holiday romance subgenre - sounds even dumber than most. And yet, somehow, against the odds, it works, due almost entirely to the chemistry between the two stars.

Lizzie (Odette Annable) is engaged to Josh (“The Vampire Diaries” Charles Michael Davis), who she thinks is the love of her life. She is an event planner and he is a doctor, but while their careers are on opposite ends of the spectrum, they both connect in their mutual need for organization in their lives. 

There is one little problem though: she can’t sleep with Josh. No, not like that: She literally cannot sleep next to him. Like, at all. While he’s out like a light, she’s either tossing and turning next to him, or staring off into space; she’s lucky to get an hour a night. Nevermind the fact that such little sleep over a long period of time would not only be a serious medical issue that would quickly lead to hallucinations and, eventually, death (look up fatal familial insomnia and prepare to have your mind blown); here, it only causes minor discomfort and a lack of focus at her job.

One night, she is out driving when she runs over a pedestrian. This is Billy, a man who’s completely the opposite of her: He works at a bar - a sign in these movies that he has no aim or career aspirations - is messy, and takes life as it comes, rather than planning it all out in advance. The only thing he shares with Lizzie is a similar case of insomnia; he can't sleep next to anyone, including his ex Nicola. 

She drives him to a hospital and, for reasons that don’t quite make a lick of sense, the two decide to rest before heading inside to get him the treatment he may very well need. Well, wouldn’t you know it that the two both wake the next morning, several hours later, refreshed and rejuvenated after a long night’s sleep. (In the case of Billy, it’s probably just due to a concussion and/or massive internal injuries.)

Lizzie thinks she’s cured of her problem, but after several more sleepless nights next to her future husband, realizes that the situation goes much deeper: She can only sleep next to Billy. Well, we don’t know this for sure, because she doesn’t even try to sleep next to anyone else; for all we know, she may be able to sleep with everyone except Josh. At any rate, she makes Billy an awkward proposition: She will pay him to sleep next to her. It’s a bizarre offer that he initially refuses, until he realizes that he can use that money to help fund a bar he’s always dreamed of opening (wow, who knew that even bartenders could have dreams). 

At first, the duo sleep together in their car, much like they did that first night. But soon, they decide to go a little more upscale, meeting together for a couple hours at a time inside a hotel. Because that’s not going to raise any eyebrows in the completely guaranteed event that Josh eventually discovers her secret double life. 

The plot progresses more or less as you’d expect, and while it doesn’t really stray away from the tried-and-true formula, it gets an insane amount of mileage out of its likable cast. The two leads (who are married in real life) feed off of each other well, delivering some humorous banter (and a knack for comedic timing) that hits the funny bone. The rest of the cast is also capable, including Charles Michael Davis, although he is given the thankless task of being a serious, uptight character in a rom-com. (He does have a scene that surprisingly has some emotional resonance late in the movie, which hits a little bit harder given the otherwise lighthearted atmosphere.)

I suppose more traditional fans of this kind of schlock might be off-put by the storyline, as Lizzie really has no reason to leave Josh. He’s not the typical douchebag you find in these movies, where you’re essentially cheering for them to find someone else; his only “crime” is being too similar to her. Similarly, this is basically a Christmas movie in name and setting only. Those expecting some holiday cheer and scenes adorned with tinsel and Christmas trees will find this to be sorely lacking; it just happens to take place around Christmastime.

But at the same time, it delivers a message that some other holiday cheesefests completely avoid: That no matter what you have, it can always be better. Well, I don’t know if that’s the message, because that sounds rather dark…the point is, life's too short to settle for someone - or something - you're not into. It's not exactly deep, but it goes deeper than you'd expect from a movie about two people who can only fall asleep next to each other.

ENTERTAINMENT RATING: 8/10

TRAILER

Pyewacket (2017)

Director: Adam MacDonald
Writer(s): Adam MacDonald
Starring: Laurie Holden, Nicole Munoz, Chloe Rose and Eric Osborne

Pyewacket is about teenage angst as filtered through the lens of a horror movie. The experience of watching it is almost like waking up groggy on a train, with no idea how you got there. Everything is blurry, and out of focus; your destination unknown. Then, slowly, you start piecing the plot together, and think you know where it’s headed, but you’re just praying you’re wrong. Then the train heads to its final destination, with you on board, powerless to steer it away from the ending you knew was coming. But, to its credit, whether you see it coming or not, it still packs a punch, thanks partly to a creepy atmosphere and genuine scares.

Leah Reyes is a high schooler whose mother just hasn’t been herself since the (presumably) recent death of her husband. She seems uncaring, at one point telling her daughter “you can do whatever you want, I don’t care,” advice that no child of any age should ever hear.

Both of them have chosen different ways of expressing their sadness: Leah turned to the occult, finding some comfort in the ideologies and beliefs of the dark arts. Her mother, on the other hand, resorts to a more straightforward approach, shutting down and succumbing to her grief. Neither one understands the others’ coping mechanisms, with Leah feeling like her mother is permanently a shadow of her former self, and her mother feeling like her daughter is irredeemably lost in a world that is all hocus pocus.

All of these emotions reach a fever pitch when Mrs. Reyes informs her daughter that she needs a change of scenery; she can’t stay in a house filled with so many hurtful memories of their past. This decision - which comes as rather sudden to Leah - further serves as proof that her mother doesn’t care about her. She thinks about having to uproot her life, and start all over with new friends. High school is already a tough time for a lot of people, and having to completely start from scratch somewhere else - with no one to turn to for immediate support - doesn’t really ease any of those feelings.

Leah reluctantly agrees to check out the new house. It’s a secluded, rustic house surrounded by woods and nothing else. The isolated setting alone could probably drive a wedge between two people, but the wedge has already been driven; the house only serves as the perfect setting for some rather excellent scares.

To show that she might not be as bad as Leah believes, her mother extends an olive branch to her daughter: Rather than uproot her life straightaway, Mrs. Reyes agrees to drive Leah to and from school - an hour each way - until the end of the school year to give her daughter some time to come to grips with the move. This isn’t enough for Leah, though, who still resents her; this leads to a fierce argument between the two which pushes the daughter over the edge.

Fed up with what she perceives as a mother who is too far gone, she uses a spell to summon Pyewacket, an entity to kill her mother. Strange things immediately start happening. They’re relatively innocent at first: footsteps moving around in the attic, dirt showing up on the floor of their house. But soon, the events start getting a little more…personal, and Leah soon starts to regret her spur-of-the-moment decision. But how can you undo something that you’ve done?

The film cleverly focuses on the relationship between them in its current state, without any past references to draw upon. It’s a portrait of two people in very different emotional states, but ones that many can relate to: A mother wracked with grief, and a daughter who is on the cusp of adulthood, trying to come to grips with her evolving emotions. Like many teens, she’s temperamental, trying to understand herself as well as the evolving world around her. Gradually, we learn the reasons behind the way things are, and it’s not as cut and dry as one would think. It’s the perfect setup for the scares that eventually unfold, some of which - like the first appearance of Pyewacket - will haunt even the most hardened horror fan.

What makes Pyewacket work so well is that the dramatic foundation is solid, even before the scares come into play. The relationship between mother and daughter is believable enough that, even if you remove the supernatural elements, the story would still be gripping. This is mainly thanks to a breakout performance from Nicole Munoz as Leah, who is convincing as a high schooler trying to make sense of a world that simply doesn’t always make sense.

She learns that the hard way. 

RATING: 7/10

TRAILER

Rich in Love (aka Ricos de Amor) (2020)

Director: Bruno Garotti 
Writer(s): Garotti and Sylvio Goncalves
Starring: Danilo Mesquita, Giovanna Lancelloti, Jaffar Bambirra and Lelle

Rich in Love is yet another Hallmark-style love story about the womanizing son of a rich tomato tycoon (?) named Teto, who rides on the coattails of this father’s success. He doesn’t seem to do anything except sleep around with random women, and drive fancy cars about the town. But who can really fault him, because he doesn’t have to do anything else. Like most all rich kids, his life is laid out before him, a fate that was already decided even before he was born: He is going to inherit “The Tomato King’s” entire empire. 

Then he meets Paula, a driven medical student with big dreams and aspirations. Teto immediately falls for her, but is faced with a dilemma: How can he be sure that Paula loves him for him and not just for his wealth? So he does what anyone would do in this situation: He pretends to be poor. Oh, and at the same time he begs his father not to simply leave him his company because he is blood, but because he actually thinks he’s the best one for the job. He’s sick of living life like an entitled brat and wants to clean up his act.

At the same time he’s pretending to be poor, he’s also pretending to be someone else to actually earn his father’s assistant position. He trades places with Igor, his friend (and father’s lawn worker), and sees the results of his privilege firsthand as the executives of his father’s company flock to him - thinking he’s Teto - while ignoring the real Tito.

One ridiculous plot device follows another: Teto turns to his father’s former assistant, Monique, to give him tips on how to get the job; he tries to be in two places at once during an important meeting, with painfully obvious results; and his two lives eventually crash together, leading to the obligatory fight between the movie’s two lovebirds. 

The line between “completely formulaic” and “original” doesn’t really exist in these movies: Add even a shred of believability and all the magic is gone. They’re supposed to be uplifting fairy tales where the good guys always fall in love, and absolutely nothing is grounded in reality. And sure enough, people looking for that type of tale - where the two main stars get together and (based on insinuation) have a happy lifetime together - won’t be disappointed. But Rich in Love does at least toggle with the formula somewhat, leading to some unexpected fates for some of its supporting characters that are at least slightly unexpected.

One such example: There isn’t a villain. At least, not in the traditional sense. Paula does have a sleazeball doctor who’s clearly interested in her (and in whom the feeling is clearly not reciprocated), but his character is relegated to the background more often than not, and aside from being an annoyance, never really factors into the story enough to even be considered a real threat. 

I have only seen one other sappy foreign rom-com, and one unifying theme is that they seem to nail the casting. I’ve mentioned it many times before (and I will mention it again for new readers to this blog), but the attractiveness of a movie’s cast is one factor that decides whether or not we’ll even watch it. It sounds shallow - and it is - but there’s just too little actual substance to these characters to be anything more than a pretty face. So when they don’t even have that, there’s really not much of a point in watching. (Or, even worse, you’ll have a good-looking man or woman opposite a not-so-attractive one, which is frustrating in its own right.)

Rich in Love not only features two good-looking leads, but they also seem to have a lot of chemistry together. I say “seem” because we did see the dubbed version on Netflix, which loses some of their performances in translation (literally and figuratively), but you can still tell they work well together, and their relationship is cute and (mostly) believable, as far as this cheese goes.

This one isn’t holiday-themed, but who cares? It’s still the type of movie people love to watch around the holidays. And really, the only difference between these and “regular” rom-coms are a few well-placed Christmas trees and tinsel in the background. This one might be even more ridiculous than most, but it’s self-aware and never takes itself too seriously. That, as well as the solid cast (and decent dubbing), are enough to elevate this well above average fare in this tired subgenre.

ENTERTAINMENT RATING: 7.5/10

TRAILER

The Princess Switch 3: Romancing the Star (2021)

Director: Mike Rohl
Writer(s): Robin Bernheim and Megan Metzger
Starring: Vanessa Hudgens, Remy Hii, Sam Palladio and Nick Sagar

We slogged through the first two movies in the series, so I suppose we’re morally obliged to continue that tradition with the third (and hopefully final) one…right?

Actually, this trilogy isn’t as bad as some, and manage to be entertaining, for the most part, despite their contrived plotlines and the complete predictability that we’ve come to expect from all cheesy holiday rom-coms. It’s all just more of the same, but I doubt that’s really going to be a warning that’s going to turn most people away; what they want is more of the same.

The third one collects the same cast from the second, with Vanessa Hudgens reprising her roles as Stacy DeNova, Lady Margaret and Fiona, Lady Margaret’s mischievous cousin. If you’ve been keeping up on the series, you’ll remember that Fiona - who made her debut in the second one - was a bad girl who had plans on stealing Lady Margaret’s throne, simply so she could empty the royal house (or whatever it’s called) of all its valuables. Because, you know, that’s a crime that wouldn’t garner global attention.

Probably deciding that they’ve done everything they can with the straight “romance” plots, this one attempts to deliver an “action-packed” adventure: Someone steals a priceless relic, the “Star of Peace”, which was loaned to Lady Margaret from the Vatican for use as a tree topper at Montenaro’s annual Tree Lighting Festivities. Uh oh! 

Fiona finds herself performing community service by working as a custodian inside a convent, which is funny because she’s so materialistic that she wouldn’t be caught dead in a place like that (ha ha). Stacy and Margaret decide that they need someone who can “think like a criminal” to get the relic back, and so they turn to Fiona to help them. The head of the orphanage allows her to leave, under the agreement that she is “returned” (like a library book) the day after Christmas.

Of course, romance is still a theme: While Stacy and Lady Margaret’s beaus are already set in stone, this time Fiona gets her own chance to fall in love. The object of her affection is Peter Maxwell, a former Interpol agent with whom the two shared a past relationship. He wants to mend things, but Fiona - who always hides behind a facade of independence - feels like it’s water under the bridge; a waste of time that isn’t worth pursuing. But one thing that they can both agree is worth pursuing, is Hunter Cunard, a rich man with too much time on his hands, whom they deduce stole the Star of Peace simply because he's a bad man.

So, of course, we’re treated to a series of “switches” that have come to define the entire series: Lady Margaret “becomes” Fiona so that she can distract Hunter while the real Fiona can attempt to navigate through the laser-protected room that houses the Star of Peace with Peter. Then, in a surprise, Stacy receives word that Fiona is due to have an immediate hearing about her probation status in the convent, but seeing as how she’s out trying to reclaim the artifact, is unable to attend her own hearing. Does that mean Stacy is going to have to step in as Fiona? No way!

This series is slowly becoming less and less charming with each iteration, and this is definitely is the least entertaining one out of the lot. It has the same "solid" cast (all of whom reprise their roles from the previous two films, if applicable) and it’s nice to see Hudgens get to let loose as Fiona; she would have made an excellent Cruella DeVille. Sure, her character is still over-the-top, and not exactly “evil”, but it’s a much needed reprieve from Stacy and Lady Margaret, who are both too “goody two shoes”.

Now for the question on everyone's minds: Will there be a fourth? God, I hope not. 

STRAY OBSERVATIONS

• They’re really not even trying now.
• The best use for a priceless relic is as a tree topper atop a public Christmas tree.
• Kevin is still a complete goof who thankfully has a lesser role in this one.
• Also with a lesser role: Well, everyone really. Even Prince Edward seems to be thrown in as an afterthought, as the series seems to be focusing entirely on new things for Vanessa Hudgens to do.
• Why couldn’t they bring back the original Olivia?!
• The only way I'd be down for a fourth one is if Vanessa Hudgens played every single role.

ENTERTAINMENT RATING: 5/10

TRAILER

Girl (2020)

Director: Chad Faust
Writer(s): Faust
Starring: Bella Thorne, Chad Faust, Mickey Rourke and Elizabeth Saunders

My how things have changed for Bella Thorne. Once a Disney superstar, she has since become this generation’s Lindsey Lohan. Well, maybe that’s a slight exaggeration - her fall hasn’t been as far, nor her landing as hard - but she seems to be gradually fading away from the limelight with each passing release. Or at least, losing her credibility.

Now she stars in Girl, as the titular “hero”: a young woman who just wakes up one day and decides she wants to kill the father who abandoned her family several years ago. However, her plan is upended when she arrives in town…only to discover that someone has already offed him.

So, problem solved, right? I mean, she goes to do something, and it’s already done. Doesn’t that mean the mission is accomplished? Sure, she wasn’t the one that got to do it, but someone took out the trash, so to speak, so she should be elated. Instead, she’s upset. The punks who did this all have to pay. Wait...what?

Seriously, that’s the plot. And no, it’s not played for laughs. Unfortunately for us, we know it’s not going to be easy, as the sheriff of the town seems to have it out for our “girl”. Why, could it be because he had something to do with her father’s murder? Why no, it couldn’t be! 

The characters exchange poorly-delivered dialogue that sounds like the writer is channeling his inner David Lynch, or Quentin Tarantino; including bizarre conversations about bizarre things in an effort to up the style quotient. But here, it’s all just empty dialogue. None of it feels natural and none of it is even slightly interesting; in fact, the attempts are often embarrassing. 

I don’t know if this just hit me in the “right” mood, but this is godawful drivel of the lowest common denominator. It’s a pile of junk in a subgenre that’s already littered with junk: the female revenge film. Thorne just walks around, casually sprouting one-liners and attempting to look "cool" as she avoids death time and time again. She gets shot, and has the same reaction I have when my muscles are sore after an intermediate arm workout. She looks like she’d rather be anywhere else but inside this movie, and I don’t really blame her one bit. 

I guess I can partially see the praise: women feeling superior to men is the new “in-thing”, and so it’s the perfect time to release a movie like that into this climate. It’s timely. But timeliness is about the only thing it has going for it, and just because it fits themes that are currently hot trends in Hollywood doesn’t mean that it doesn’t suck. Because it does. Very, very hard.

It sucks harder than any movie I can remember in recent memory. Seriously. I’m sure I’ve seen technically worse movies, but this one tops almost all of them for one reason: expectations. You see, I actually had none. Well, I take that back: I thought it would suck. I just never in a million years thought it would be this terrible. It somehow took my expectations, and completely destroyed them in a way that I wasn’t expecting. 

I guess its timeliness is the only thing that got it onto a streaming service instead of its rightful place inside the Walmart bargain bin.

RATING: 1.5/10

TRAILER

Till Death (2021)

Director: S.K. Dale
Writer(s): Jason Carvey
Starring: Megan Fox, Eoin Macken, Callan Mulvey and Jack Roth

Till Death is one of those movies with a plot so preposterous that seeing it is the only way you could believe such a thing exists. It's a mix of ridiculous and fascinating and really opens the door for a lot of things to happen between its vague plot line.

Megan Fox plays Emma, a woman unhappily married to a rich douchebag. He's a type of character that the film goes to great lengths to let you know is a villain, as everything he does is questionable and sleazy. Why can't bad guys be normal people? Why do they always have to be so terrible that it's completely obvious? Maybe it's because the filmmakers don't want anyone to be able to identify with such terrible characters; make them likable and it insinuates anyone could be evil and - while that’s the truth - it isn’t the right mood for entertainment.

Anyway, as the film opens Megan Fox is telling her lover that she can no longer see him. Her reasoning is that today happens to be her anniversary, and she wants to spend it with her husband for reasons unknown. 

At any rate, Emma's douchebag husband takes her on a getaway to an isolated cabin in the middle of nowhere, during the winter season. He frames it as part of her anniversary gift. But things take a dark turn when she wakes up chained to him, and is forced to watch as he blows his brains out inches in front of her. 

Shackled to her dead husband, and in virtual isolation, she must find a way out of this nightmare scenario. Unfortunately for her, he was almost as smart as he was douchey, removing all sharp objects from the house, destroying her phone, and making things as hard for her from beyond the grave as he did while he was alive.

Really, it's a plot that sounds limited and stupid at first glance, but the potential complexity of it kind of grows on you after a little while. You think about all the things you take for granted, like being able to walk around freely, and then have to think about doing all that stuff with 200 lb of weight attached to you. At its best, it almost manages to be intelligent, but it's unfortunately done in by a number of copouts and groan-inducing sequences that break up the momentum, and take the viewer out of the story.

You know the scene in movies where the bad guy is looking for the protagonist, who is hiding around the corner inches away, yet when the bad guy turns the corner, they’re suddenly gone? Even though there was no possible way they could escape, or move so silently, in such a short amount of time? That’s basically the whole damn movie. It's true that horror movies and thrillers rely on this a lot, but it’s usually at least kept to a minimum. Till Death uses that device no fewer than five times, with increasingly ridiculous results every single time. It’s like the writers painted themselves into a corner, and rather than think of a logical way out, just defaulted to that over and over again.

There is some suspense, but not as much as there could be, thanks to the rather predictable nature of the script. Every event is pretty clearly foreshadowed, so as long as you're paying attention you'll know pretty much exactly what's to come and what you can expect. 

Megan Fox is clearly one of those actresses who's made it as far as she has based purely on looks, but she turns in a competent performance here as the damsel in distress. No, she's obviously not going to win any awards for her performance, but it’s the kind of role that proves she’s more than just a pretty face. The rest of the cast follow suit, almost making the material convincing despite its flaws. Unfortunately, the issues behind the camera doom Till Death from blooming into the cult classic - or even minor classic - it could have been.

RATING: 5/10.

TRAILER

Dangerous Lies (2020)

Director: Michael M. Scott
Writer(s): David Golden
Starring: Camila Mendes, Jessie T. Usher, Sasha Alexander and Elliott Gould

If there was one place I honestly didn’t expect Netflix to go, it was in the direction of Lifetime movies. I guess I didn’t expect them to get all Hallmark-y, either, but I guess that makes a little more sense: Everyone’s looking for a little holiday cheer come Christmastime, and who better to provide it than the world’s most popular streaming service?

But how can you explain their voluntarily willingness to create complete garbage? Okay, maybe it’s slightly “higher-end” than some of the stuff MarVista pumps, featuring semi-famous actors and higher production costs, but at the end of the day, it’s really all for nothing. Here we have their attempt at a Lifetime “thriller” that even comes complete with a bland, broadly descriptive title.

Admittedly, this one has a decent plot that takes some time to fully unfold: Katie and Adam are a couple struggling to make ends meet, which seems very authentic considering Camila Mendes, who plays her, stars in “Riverdale” a rather popular show on CW. I’m sure she’s struggling. Anyway, Katie constantly stresses over their financial situation, while Adam seems rather laid-back about it.

Then, Katie gets a job caring for Leonard, an elderly man who lives alone with no family or friends. The two hit it off and get along so well, that Leonard even offers her some money when she lets slip that her and her man are struggling financially. She is reluctant, but eventually turns him down. That doesn’t stop a $7,000 check from showing up; once again, the two are hesitant about what to do with it, but eventually agree to cash it.

Then, Leonard dies somewhat suddenly. While randomly going through his things, they stumble on an old storage chest, which has all of his life’s greatest memories. But, hidden in a compartment underneath that, are several large bills. (Well, the bills themselves are normal size, but the amounts on the bills are pretty high.) Totalling close to $100,000. Once again, they are confused about how to go about it, but figure if they let it go, it will just end up in a police station somewhere, so they opt to take it.

At least, that’s how they make it seem…yet a couple days later, Adam goes back to the house to retrieve the money, and gets smacked in the head by someone who’s apparently after it himself. Wait…if the police were there, don’t you think they would have searched the chest that was mere feet away from the deceased? I guess not.

Anyway, the hard-luck couple learn that, in his will, Leonard left everything to Katie. Now all of a sudden their theft of that money doesn’t seem all that illegal! However, all of their past actions - most of them innocent - come back to haunt them as a hard-nosed woman named Detective Chesler attempts to get to the bottom of the mysterious death. Things get even more grim for our lovable duo when another body turns up…it would seem as if Katie just happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, every single time. Is there something she’s keeping from us, the viewer? Or are there outside forces beyond her control dictating the couple’s fate?

Oh yeah, and true to form for these movies, there are a few subplots going on at the same time to keep us on our toes: A handsome man named Mickey Hayden keeps popping by on random days in an attempt to buy the house from Katie. The more he gets denied, the more he seems to follow them around. And then there’s the additional body that turns up in Leonard’s home…who seemed to be holding a pouch of diamonds. Who’s in on the plot to undo Katie? And how far are they willing to go to accomplish that goal?

This is a pretty typical example of a B-grade thriller with an excessively ridiculous plot, most of which escalates because of poor communication: There are several points where Katie and Adam are under suspicion, but don’t even try to explain the truth, making things appear way worse than they ought to. The twists and turns are also pretty generic, feeling tacked-on and without much conviction. 

The cast is alright, but they don’t stand a chance against a poor script and equally disappointing execution. It’s really a completely average attempt at a thriller, without much in the way of thrills or intensity. Even sadder: There really aren't many inadvertent moments of laughter, which I guess is giving the filmmakers' credit for not being totally incompetent. The issue is, that just makes it even more boring. 

If you like your mysteries lukewarm and largely ineffective, Dangerous Lies would be a great way to kill a winter’s night. 

ENTERTAINMENT RATING: 5/10

TRAILER

The Princess Switch 2: Switched Again (2020)

Director: Mike Rohl
Writer(s): Robin Bernheim and Megan Metzger
Starring: Vanessa Hudgens (x3), Sam Palladio, Nick Sagar and Mia Lloyd

The Princess Switch 2: Switched Again is the perfect movie for anyone who felt like the first one didn’t have enough Vanessa Hudgens. It also operates under the assumption that the first one was too easy to follow. So, they give us 33% more Vanessa and throw in a triple-switch scenario that is complex by simplicity. I mean, any time you’re dealing with multiple copies of one person, things are bound to get a little confusing. 

The first one saw Stacy DeNovo and Lady Margaret swap so that the latter could see what life is like for a “commoner”, and the former could fall in love with a prince. In this one, the plot is even more threadbare: Following the breakup of Lady Margarent and the goofy manchild Kevin, Lady Margaret - who is now about to take over as the “King/Queen” of Montenaro - tempts the idea of getting closer to Antonio Rossi, her chief of staff and clear scumbag. Stacy refuses to allow the fair Lady to fall victim to such a sleazeball, but in preparation of her forthcoming coronation, she simply feels like she doesn’t have enough time to talk to anyone, including the man who she feels is the love of her life.

So Stacy makes a suggestion: Switch bodies again, so that Lady Margaret (who will look like Stacy) can be a “commoner” again, thus giving her ample time to patch things up with that grinning idiot Kevin. Okay, this is already stupid, but there’s another character to add to the proceedings: Lady Margaret’s cousin, Fiona, who also happens to look like her and Stacy. She’s the “evil” one of the family, and arguably the first quantifiable villain in the entire series. She hatches a terrible plan to (forcefully) switch places with Lady Margaret, be crowned queen, and then loot the royal treasury. You know, because that plan is foolproof.

As can be expected following the runaway success of the first one, this ups the preposterousness of the original to ridiculous extremes, which should appeal to fans of the series. Of course, that means it’s even less logical than part one, but logic is never something one watches this type of movie for. 

Fiona is an okay villain, who at least allows Hudgens the chance to play a more wild version of these characters. She (and her henchman) are exact copies of the prototypical slapstick villain, trying to ooze evil within the confines of a family-friendly rating; I suppose she succeeds given the odds stacked against her, but it’s all obvious stuff. Supposedly, this character also sticks around for the third one (Lord, have mercy on our souls), as Stacy and Lady Margaret must turn to her to stop some bad guys who want to pull off a royal heist, or something.

There’s really no need to go on any further, because you already know if this is something you would be interested in or not. It does nothing new with the formula - in fact, it somewhat regresses by using more tropes than the first one - but there’s still a mostly likable cast and scenes of almost-enraging illogic, two requirements of the subgenre. Fans of the first should find almost just as many things to like the second time around.

STRAY OBSERVATIONS

• It's a shame Alexa Adeosun, who played Olivia in the first one, doesn't make a return here. Instead, her character is played by Mia Lloyd, who is much more annoying.

ENTERTAINMENT RATING: 6/10

TRAILER

Saint Maud (2019)

Director: Rose Glass
Writer(s): Glass
Starring: Morfydd Clark, Caoilfhionn Dunne, Jennifer Ehle and Marcus Hutton

Maud is a newly-devout Christian nurse who gets a job caring after Amanda, a retired dancer who wants to spend her final days living life to the fullest that she can. The two strike up an almost immediate friendship, but soon Maud’s religious lifestyle starts to interfere with their once-strong bond. 

Mainly to blame for that: Carol, a prostitute whom Amanda pays to keep her company. Carol is loose, and fun, two characteristics that scare away religious extremists. With her, Amanda feels like she can truly be herself and let down her guard. Just the idea of this bothers Maud, who gets it in her head that her current mission from God is to “save” Amanda before she passes. 

Her hatred for Carol reaches a fever pitch when she catches her talking to a friend on the phone. Her tone insinuates that she doesn’t really care for Amanda, and that she’s just doing it for the money, which shouldn’t really come as a surprise, since that’s the entire idea behind that line of work. But Maud doesn’t take kindly to the idea of someone “using” Amanda, and she confronts Carol, telling her to stay away.

This upsets Amanda, who finds out the reasoning behind it, but who refuses to buckle to Maud’s controlling behavior. She throws a birthday bash, inviting all of her friends, and Maud is disgusted to find that Carol is one of them. Maud confronts Amanda, but is taunted by the partygoers, who aren’t impressed with Maud’s devotion to a higher power that most of them don’t believe in. Unsurprisingly, a short while later, Maud is fired.

We also learn that Maud has a secret history, through her interactions with an old friend, Joy, who calls her “Katie”. The two exchange pleasantries (well, the “pleasantries” are mostly one-sided), and Joy is somewhat shocked to learn that Maud is still working as a nurse, following a terrible accident that resulted in the death of a former patient. “Katie” was also promiscuous party girl, who would go out drinking and frequently engage in casual hookups. Presumably, it was a combination of these two things that lead her down the path of righteousness. 

It’s the type of film one would expect from studio A24, which rose to prominence in horror circles following the release of the divisive folk horror tale The Witch. That attention was only magnified when they brought Hereditary to the masses, an equally alienating tale that probably shouldn’t have played in wide release. Love them or hate them (and I’m actually somewhere in the middle), you have to give them credit for their dedication to producing and distributing challenging, thought-provoking stories that exist well outside the mainstream.

Saint Maud follows their horror formula down to a “T”, by focusing on a consistent atmosphere of unpredictable dread, rather than gore or jump scares (although there is one fantastic jump scare late in the movie that caught us both off guard). Also true to their formula: It’s not a film for everyone, especially those who prefer action over slow burn stories. Watching Maud’s slow descent into madness leads to a crescendo of expected violence, but the “fun” - if that’s the right word - is how it gets there. 

One of A24’s strengths is in the casting, and once again they knock it out of the park. Morfydd Clark’s performance, as the titular character, is powerful stuff, and a direct reason the material works as well as it does. She is a woman who truly believes she is doing the Lord’s work, and will do anything she can to succeed in her “mission”, a chilling notion that’s made all the more chilling when you realize there are actually people like this in the world. 

When Saint Maud is effective, it’s effective. When it’s not, it’s actually kind of - dare I say it? - boring. There are a few transitional stretches that just aren’t really all that interesting, mainly focusing on Maud as she tries to find meaning in her life following her unexpected termination. I guess it’s all a part of the “slow burn” atmosphere, but it loses its footing, and spends a good amount of time trying to get back on level ground. 

To the surprise of no one, this one was a critical darling, packing in just enough philosophical scenes to appeal to the critics who feel like they have to praise anything that feels higher-brow than a slasher (or that is released by A24). It’s yet another divisive entry in the studio’s canon, and yet another one that didn’t quite hit as hard as it wants to. There are powerful scenes, sure, but as a whole, it feels just like good ol’ Maud herself: A well-intentioned mess struggling to find meaning in life. 

That being said, the final shot packs one hell of a gut punch. If only the rest would have followed suit.

RATING: 5.5/10

TRAILER

#Alive (2020)

Director: Il Cho
Writer(s): Cho, based on an original screenplay by Matt Naylor
Starring: Yoo Ah-in, Park Shin-Hye, Jeon Bae-soo and Hyun Wook-Lee

Several years ago - I mean, we're probably talking about two decades at this point - the zombie subgenre was actually my favorite in horror. The shambling creatures first came to the forefront in George Romero’s seminal 1968 chiller Night of the Living Dead, was reinforced by its (overrated) sequel Dawn of the Dead a decade later, and then arguably came to further prominence thanks to a spate of mostly low-budget Italian knockoffs, like Lucio Fulci’s Zombie. There was just something about the idea of monsters that were really only effective in hordes (but that could easily multiply from one, into a whole army) that was just terrifying to me. Then Hollywood came, as usual, to ruin it all, putting them in the mainstream and overflooding theaters with subpar effort after subpar effort until I stopped caring altogether.

But #Alive seemed a little bit different, outside of the annoying recent trend to put a hashtag in front of its title. This one focuses on one man who is apparently the only survivor in a city that’s suddenly overrun with the living dead, when a random, unexplained event turns all the people in a city into bloodthirsty zombies. 

That’s essentially the entire setup. The man is Oh Joon-woo, a college-aged guy whose parents are away, leaving him alone in the high-rise apartment they own. Joon-woo doesn’t seem to have much in the way of aspirations or dreams, and seems perfectly content playing video games to pass the time. All that changes, though, when there are suddenly news reports of people randomly turning into violent, bloodthirsty creatures. He looks out the window and sees mayhem in the streets: people are being chased and attacked by waves of seemingly normal people turned violent. 

He panics, his first thought being his parents. They text to tell him they are okay, which relieves him for the time being. He barricades himself in, but then hears someone begging for help outside his door. Since we have to see that our main character is worth rooting for because he has a heart of gold, Joon-woo decides to let the man in…only to find that he has been bitten and is going to turn into a raging psychopath. After a struggle, Oh Joon-woo manages to kill him.

Soon, he discovers that the mounting number of the undead isn’t his only concern: the electricity and water in his building are turned off, and phone service becomes unreliable. He manages to send out a video through social media to his followers, asking for help, but it goes unanswered. Hunger and thirst are starting to play a role, and in a moment of weakness, he decides suicide is the best way out. But in the midst of his attempt, a laser pointer stops him as he dangles from the rope. He struggles to free himself from the noose and discovers another young survivor who lives in an adjacent building. This is Kim Yoo-bin, a female with whom he quickly forges a short-distance bond.

The two eventually meet up in person, and combine their wits to survive in a city where survival seems impossible. Kim suggests that they go to the 8th floor of his apartment building, which seems to be totally vacant; there they can at least relax a little bit and buy enough time to come up with a plan. They make it…only to discover nothing can be that easy. Meanwhile, hordes of the undead force their way into the building, giving them precious little time to hatch an escape plan. Can they make it out #alive, or will they just become more #victims for the #undead?

One thing I hate about the “only man alive” description that marketing materials use to describe it is that that’s rarely the case. It’s a great idea in theory to have one person against insurmountable odds, but unless it was pulled off perfectly, focusing on one person would get pretty boring pretty quickly. Besides, the trailer itself (and even the poster!) shows Kim Yoo-bin so we know he’s not the only one left right off the bat. Why do film descriptions have to be misleading in order to gain viewers? How would this movie be any different or less appealing if it acknowledged there was at least one other survivor? Even the idea of a small group of people would be terrifying when they’re still outnumbered 5,000 to 1. 

Ultimately, your appreciation for #Alive will depend directly on your level of patience. It often feels more like a character study that happens to have zombies in it; there are long moments of inaction, especially in the beginning as it focuses on Joon-woo and sets up its basic story. Once it gets going there are more tense moments spread throughout, but it doesn’t really hit its peak until the final 15 minutes, or so. That will pretty much alienate fans of blood and gore - two things that are frequently staples of the subgenre - as there really isn’t much bloodshed until toward the end (and even then, it's mostly your run of the mill blunt force trauma to the head of the undead). 

Then there’s the ending, which is absolutely awful. I can’t say too much without giving it away, but it almost feels like an antithesis to everything that came before it. It doesn’t quite ruin the entire film, but it comes damn close; a convenient finish that feels contrived and unearned. 

Balancing out the film’s potential weaknesses are the zombies themselves: They're actually some of the most terrifying zombies since 28 Days Later. The makeup effects are excellent, featuring shredded faces insinuating days of decay, pupils gone and replaced with nothing but white. Thanks to the sound design, the way they violently jolt and stumble around is chilling, as are their screams, which they use to communicate with other zombies. Oh, and just like the zombies in Danny Boyle’s horror opus, they can run. There’s not much original about them, but they are appropriately menacing and give off a feeling of danger in scenes where the main characters are forced to face them. 

It’s actually a shame this is a Netflix production; it has the look and feel of a low-budget horror film, and actually could have worked much better within the confines of a limited budget. A lower-quality picture full of graininess, and a smaller cast (of zombies) that could have heightened the intensity and given the sequences a greater sense of urgency. It just looks too polished for what it is, and that further helps to drag it down a bit.

Despite its flaws, though, #Alive is still a slightly above average example of a subgenre that has been done to death. It doesn’t exactly breathe new life into the zombie film as some have suggested, but it does make effective use out of its confined setting, and limited (living) cast. You just can’t help noticing there’s a much better film buried in there somewhere, just waiting to get out.

RATING: 5.5/10

TRAILER

The Perfection (2020)

Director: Richard Shepard
Writer(s): Shepard, Nicole Snyder and Eric C. Charmelo

Starring: Logan Browning, Allison Williams, Steven Weber and Alaina Huffman

If you were to believe the marketing materials for The Perfection, you might be led to believe that it's a violent grotesque film that led to several audience members leaving or passing out. If that is truly the case it wouldn't be because of the film's level of violence, but rather the lack of a visual trigger warning as the film deals with some pretty heavy themes, albeit quite poorly.

It all centers on Charlotte and Elizabeth Wells, two members of an elite music school for cellists. Actually, Charlotte was a former member who left to take care of her sick mother 10 years prior, and is returning because her mother finally passed. So great was her gift that she is welcomed back with open arms, and paraded around by the mysterious Anton. She seems to take an immediate liking to Lizzie, and vice versa - before you know it the two are making love in a hotel room.

As it turns out, it’s a case of perfect timing: She is getting a week off - her first one in a long time - and doesn’t seem to even have a grasp on how to spend it: she has lived and breathed music for so long that there hasn’t been any time to think about anything else. Charlotte suggests they get away for a little while so that she can clear her mind. But during the long bus ride, things quickly take a turn for the worse. Lizzie complains that she doesn’t feel well and starts to vomit. She’s in pain to the point that she feels like she’s dying. Charlotte tries comforting her, but to no avail; eventually, they cause such a commotion that the bus driver kicks them off the bus in the middle of nowhere. 

This leads to a shocking act of violence that comes complete with computer generated bugs (?) and that will eventually test the newly-formed bond between the two. But is everything as it appears to be? Or is there more to the story that we might not know about? 

The Perfection is one of those movies that seems to think it’s cooler than it actually is. During a couple points, after a revelatory scene, it rewinds back in time to show what actually happened to lead us up to that point. It’s kind of a neat narrative trick similar to the one used in Funny Games, only it’s less necessary here; the details are often pretty obvious beforehand, which means the “rewinding” only hammers home what we already pretty much assumed. 

It’s also broken down into four separate sections, presumably because the director saw this idea used in other movies and thought it was cool. Once again, it’s completely pointless: The chapters don’t break the story down in any meaningful way, and actually become more of a distraction than anything else. 

The performances are good, and about the only reason that one should even bother sitting through this mess. The “twist” is timely, but it completely missed the mark for me. Maybe it’s because the route the story takes to get to where it’s going is completely nonsensical. It’s the central act of violence - and most of the events thereafter - that relegate this one to the garbage bin. Not at all because it’s shocking, but because the sequence feels like a cheap attention grab; an irrelevant moment that easily could have been replaced with something less...tacky that still could have propelled the story forward in a much more meaningful way.

And maybe that would have even given the revelation the proper attention it deserves. It could have made it the most powerful moment, instead of just feeling like another tacked on attempt to be relevant. I'm not at all saying the attempted message isn't worthwhile, because it absolutely is. But when the trailer focuses on the "appalling" violence, and makes it seem more like a slasher than one that carries weight, it cheapens the effect, almost making it feel exploitative. 

Then we get down to the finale, and are treated to yet another “rewind” moment that shows us exactly how the characters ended up in the predicament they’re in. And all I could think about is how I wish I could steal that remote, and rewind back to a time before I suggested we watch this mess.

RATING: 3.5/10

TRAILER

Squared Love (aka Mitosc do kwadratu) (2021)

Director: Filip Zybler
Writer(s): Wiktor Piatkowski and Marzanna Polit

Starring: Adrianna Cheblika, Mateusz Banasiuk, Agnieszka Zulewska and Krzysztof Czeczot

Well, what do we have here? Just when I thought it was only Hollywood that was stupid enough to repackage the same garbage over and over again, and then have the nerve to regift it to us with a brand new bow, we have a Polish attempt at Hallmark-style tripe! Who knew foreign cinema could sink that low?

True-to-form, the plot is legendarily laughable: Enzo (real name: Stefan…more on that later) is a model and playboy obsessed with only two things in life: women and fast cars (and not necessarily in that order). He spends his days cruising around in fancy vehicles, using his natural charm to pick up women, whom he then, presumably, disposes of the next day. However, since this is supposed to be a lighthearted romance, we’re spared the emotional details and consequences of his steady stream of one-night stands, and instead focus on what a lovable douchebag he is.

Monika (that is her real name; she’s also known as Klaudia…more on that later) is a schoolteacher who’s in danger of being fired by her principal thanks to her unorthodox teaching methods - namely, that she makes school fun. Her father (who the writers didn’t even bother to give a name; he’s credited only as “Father of Klaudia”) is a depressed, gullible man who got in too deep with some local gangsters, and borrowed more money than he could pay back. Well, we all know what happens to people who don’t pay back loan sharks.

He is given an ultimatum: If they don’t receive their money - in full - within 30 days, they will kill him. Again, though, this is supposed to be lighthearted fare, so the threats are done as “nice” as possible, even after said goons visit his shop and give him a severe beating. Monika is desperate to save her father and the memory of her mother (who, of course, died years ago, a favorite plot point for this kind of junk) so she moonlights as a model, Klaudia, in an attempt to make ends meet because her schoolteacher salary clearly isn’t enough.

Meanwhile, Enzo is a model who is dumped by his coldhearted, unattractive girlfriend at the beginning, which gives him free reign to terrorize the town (although it appeared he still did the same thing when he was with her; aaaah, those lovable womanizing types). He does need a place to stay, though, so he temporarily moves in with his brother, Andrzej, where we learn that “Enzo” is just his modeling alias, and Stefan is his real name. As it turns out, the two of them have a mutual connection: Andrzej’s wife just left him to go “find herself”, or something of the sort, but mentions that she will be returning at some point. This puts Andrzej in a tough spot, because he’s apparently too busy to watch his school-aged child, Ania, even though we never actually see him leave the house, or act as a parental figure whatsoever.

Thus, Stefan is tasked with taking care of the child, presumably as a favor for Andzrej letting him stay at his house indefinitely. There, he meets Ania’s teacher who is - would you believe it if I told you - Monika! Gee, what are the odds of that? There is instant chemistry between the two, but of course as the nerdy, prude schoolteacher, he can’t just charm the pants off her the way he has with so many women before. But he can already sense she’s not like other women, and he slowly starts to develop actual feelings for her. Are you following me so far?

During all of this, Enzo (who is still managed by his ex) gets cast in an advertisement for a new sportscar. Of course, no commercial for a fast, slick vehicle is complete without a female object for men to ogle over…and guess who gets that role? Would you believe it if I told you it’s the schoolteacher moonlighting as a model, Klaudia? Enzo finds himself falling for both women, and of course is completely unaware they are the same person, leading to a painful scene in which he asks schoolteacher Monika advice on how to impress Klaudia. Can you imagine giving someone advice on how to impress yourself? And how used you must feel knowing that he likes an alternate version of you more than the real you? That doesn’t seem to bother her, though, and she obliges.

So, to recap, Enzo/Stefan is balancing life as a loving uncle, and model, while Monika/Klaudia is tiptoeing the line between schoolteacher and model. Hijinx ensues, until her true identity is revealed, much to the shock of everyone (including her own father)!

Honestly, I was shocked to see the hate leveled at this movie, because this is one of the best B-grade rom-coms I’ve ever seen. The two leads are attractive and fit their roles well, while they also seem to have actual chemistry - I wouldn’t call the scenes between them “electric”, but they are believable as a pairing, and seem both natural and comfortable in their scenes together. This alone elevates it above typical fare. The comedic aspects stay true to the film’s lighthearted approach, with Monika’s red-haired colleague (known only as Teacher #1) stealing the supporting show as a chain-smoking teacher who always finds a reason to grab a cigarette. 

Also, and maybe it’s just me, but I felt like Klaudia does look different enough as Monika to throw Enzo off, at least for a while, although you would think the more he got to know “both”, he would start to see similarities. Even Ania, whom Enzo/Stefan brings on set of the commercial, confidently declares that the two are the same person around the mid-point of the movie…something that she never mentions again, and a fact that Enzo/Stefan just brushes off. It’s a rather confusing scene that would have made more sense if it were placed toward the end, and also further proof of the subgenre’s willful stupidity and complete lack of logic.

However, as we all know, the point of these movies are to watch two attractive people fall in love, logic be damned. Or, in this case, watching one man fall in love with two women, who are actually one and the same. On those grounds, it works. Sure, there are the obligatory, cheesy montages of Stefan and Monika carelessly frolicking in the rain, and his immediate taking to Ania despite clearly being uninterested in children. All of this is par for the course. But what it does, it does well, and all the while consistently maintaining the cheesy, over-the-top atmosphere required in this tired subgenre.

Working against it, though, is its length: Squared Love clocks in at an overbloated 133 minutes. That’s right, 2 hours and 13 minutes. The average length of this kind of tripe is around 90 minutes, because there’s only so much of this sugary bullshit that people can take before it starts to rot brain cells. We happened to break it down into two viewings (by accident; it was late and we got tired) so it didn’t feel overlong, but I’m sure it would have been noticeable if we watched it all at once. And the film does certainly try to cram in a ridiculous number of unnecessary subplots that easily could have been excised without damaging the "integrity" of the script.

Furthermore, let me be clear here: Squared Love is not a good piece of cinema. Even within the wide confines of a rom-com, it’s way too ridiculous and overblown to function as a valid example of a legitimately good romantic comedy. But for what it is - namely, a foreign retread of predictable Hallmark-style love stories - it has enough charm to carry it above most other contenders in a subgenre littered with so much below-average fare, that there really isn’t even a shining example of success.

STRAY OBSERVATIONS

• Kid characters in these movies are almost always annoying, frequently thrown in as a convenient way to show the main character’s “progress” - and also usually meant to be annoying - but Ania refreshingly comes off as down-to-Earth, and never even comes close to being a frustrating character.
• Does Andzrej even know how to be a father? He’s rarely ever seen with Ania, and even when he is, never gives her any kind of emotional support - or any kind of support - whatsoever. Maybe that's why his wife decided to up and leave, although that's pretty terrible in its own right.
• One thing dragging this down: As if the plot already isn’t “full” enough, Monika is constantly harassed by the school principal, who is eagerly looking for a way to get rid of her. Upcoming nationwide exams provide an opportunity to do that, as if her class doesn’t pass, her time is up. There’s really little time devoted to showing her preparing her students for said test, making this a throwaway subplot.
• There’s also another throwaway character in Wiesiek, a sleazy man who works for Monika’s father, and who is somehow the only one who notices more than a passing resemblance between her and Klaudia; he threatens to out her if she doesn’t give in to his (presumably sexual, but still "playful") demands. 
• The Netflix version of this is dubbed, which given the chance, I’m usually against. But I thought the dubbing work was actually pretty good. Sure, the mouths don’t line up with what the people are saying, but the voice acting itself is believable, and matches the characters well.
• Aside from letting the two brothers bond, what is the point of having Ania's mom up and leave? She even comes back at the very end, but is never seen, and the reasons she left - as well as its effect on Andzrej - are never explored.
• The inclusion of Enzo/Stefan's ex is pointless, as there's no real drama between them considering they're technically single. If there is jealousy between her and Klaudia, which is kind of hinted at in a couple scenes, it's yet another thing that is never explored.
• Now that I think about it, most of this movie is completely unnecessary. 

ENTERTAINMENT RATING: 7.5/10. That’s right, 7.5.

TRAILER

Spontaneous (2020)

Director: Brian Duffield
Writer(s): Duffield
Starring: Katherine Langford, Charlie Plummer, Yvonne Orji and Hayley Law

Spontaneous is the kind of film that will either win you over or turn you off based entirely on its synopsis: “When students in their school begin exploding (literally), seniors Mara and Dylan struggle to survive in a world where each moment may be their last.” That’s right, the entire thing is about high school students exploding in a cloud of blood at random times, and for seemingly no reason.

I mean, that’s pretty much it for the plot. There are really no villains, or other obstacles that get in the way of the main stars’ quests for love…although, I guess randomly exploding is problematic enough. It’s just about two lovebirds navigating through the uncertainty of a high school life made even more uncertain thanks to an unidentifiable epidemic. They know they can be taken away from each other at any given time, so they decide to live life to the fullest.

Of course, detonated teenagers aren’t the sole point of the movie: Like Ginger Snaps - which used the bite of a werewolf as a metaphor for a teenager experiencing her first period - Spontaneous uses its gruesome setup as an allegory for…well, a lot of things. There’s the awkwardness of high school, the joys of love, the ups and downs of life in general, grief, dealing with loss, rebelling against authorities, etc., all from the perspective of a group of teens who are on the precipice of adulthood. And it deals with those things with a knack for tossing in some humor to soften the potential edges of such a weird, dark premise.

Mara is played by the lovely Katherine Langford, now blonde, who was memorable as Hannah in the dramatic series “13 Reasons Why”. Here, she plays a very similar character, although she gets a lot more screentime, seeing as how, you know, she’s not dead. She has a natural charm about her and uses it to full effect here. She’s the type of actress who’s just instantly likable the moment she appears onscreen; she has an understated personality that wins you over without the appearance of her even having to try. 

It helps that she’s surrounded by a capable cast, including Charlie Plummer as Dylan, the guy with whom she forges an almost immediate bond (once they actually talk to each other). He’s got an innocence about him, a boyish charm that never forces him to resort to being the “bad boy” in order to keep his girl's attention. Their chemistry feels natural, which only helps to make the weird material around them work better than it should. 

Also refreshing: Mara’s parents (played by Rob Huebel and Piper Perabo, in a rare post-Coyote Ugly appearance). They’re the cool parents who let her do what she wants (within reason), because they trust that she won’t do anything stupid. That makes some of the later scenes between them all the more powerful, as their once-relaxed demeanor changes into desperation once Mara's behavior takes a turn for the worse. 

The relationship between parents and their children are where coming-of-age films (and movies in general) frequently miss their mark, but that might actually be the most impressive thing about Spontaneous. They strike the perfect balance between being her friend and letting her navigate through life on her own, but also provide emotional support when she needs it. And when she takes things too far, they aren’t afraid to put their feet (foot?) down. There’s a feeling of effortlessness in their scenes together that is so smooth, you wouldn't be surprised if they were relatives in real life. 

It’s far from perfect - Mara’s bombastic final monologue is almost cringe-inducing in its delivery and message - but Spontaneous provides a surprising amount of charm to balance out its bloodletting. And the comedy, which is often genuinely funny, manages to keep things feel as lighthearted as a movie about exploding teenagers can be. There’s some heartfelt moments, sure, but it somehow never veers into dark territory. 

That’s what makes this a great date movie: whether you’re into horror or romance, chances are you’re going to find a lot to like here. There’s enough blood to satiate the horror fans, but enough genuine emotions and connections to satisfy those looking for a good love story. It might not excel at either, but it pulls the combination off well enough to warrant a viewing to those looking for a unique experience that, like its characters, is more than happy to exist outside the norm.

RATING: 6/10

TRAILER

Forever Christmas (aka Mr. 365) (2018)

Director: Christie Will Wolf
Writer(s): Gary Goldstein, based off the story "Mr. 365" by Ruth Clampett
Starring: Chelsea Hobbs, Christopher Russell, Matthew Kevin Anderson and Jill Morrison

Will Saunders is an attractive man who just so happens to celebrate Christmas every single day. He also employs a former homeless man, Hank, because when you’re this perfect, that’s the type of thing you just do. Sophia Worthy is a TV producer tasked with shooting a reality TV series with him at the center. There’s one little problem, though: Sophia isn’t a fan of the holiday season, which is exactly what makes her perfect for the job of interviewing someone who’s obsessed with it. She approaches Will, and he is understandably reluctant; he just wants to go about his daily business without interference, or attention, from the public. But the two share an undeniable bond and so it carries weight when Sophie reassures him that he will be painted in a positive light.

But enjoying Christmas 365 days a year is not something that comes without its fair share of problems: Will’s neighbor, Fred, is a curmudgeonly old guy who has filed an injunction against Will, barring him from putting Christmas lights up before November 1st. Why? No reason, really, except that he’s just an old guy with a permanent scowl frozen on his face, presumably from decades of being a smug asshole.

Anyway, Sophia and Will start to fall for each other (surprise!) but Sophie knows that if news of their relationship gets out, that she might be fired from her company, so they keep it on the down-low…until it gets out anyway thanks to Paul Rivera, Sophie’s nefarious boss. But he’s not just content with outing Sophia’s make-out session with Will: he also decides to take the innocent reality series and turn it into a smear campaign against Will, making him look like a bumbling idiot. (Although he does claim it was his bosses that wanted it, but still…have a spine!) This understandably upsets Will, who sees it as betrayal on Sophie’s part. After all, it’s the exact thing she promised would never happen!

Will true love overcome all blah blah blah blah? Blah blah blah blah blah blah!

You already know what’s going to happen just from reading the plot synopsis, so why are you even interested in watching it, or reading more about it? The two leads are very attractive, and seem to have a decent amount of chemistry together, which at least makes the romance aspect somewhat believable. They also deliver decent performances that are above the demands of the Z-grade material, and that are somewhat grounded in reality - the same can’t be said for the rest of the cast, who basically deliver theatrics that would feel more at home in a kids movie. The rest of the story is absurd…I’d call it a complete mess, but honestly, it’s no worse than anything else from Hallmark. 

In fact, I have a confession to make: the streaming service we watched this on somehow kept glitching out during the final ten minutes, and despite our best attempts, we were unable to actually finish it. But I have a feeling I can accurately fill in the blanks! 

I probably could have done the same if it glitched out within the first five.

STRAY OBSERVATIONS

• What the hell is with the poster art? It makes Sophie look like a creepy stalker as she peers out from behind a Christmas tree…
• What is the point of having the old guy in it at all? He spends the whole movie unconvincingly trying to look upset at Will, and then has a complete about-face at the end, for no apparent reason.
• Why are even decent examples of these movies so, so painful? And why do I keep subjecting myself to them?

ENTERTAINMENT RATING: 6.5/10

TRAILER

Love Hard (2021)

Director: Hernan Jiminez
Writer(s): Danny Mackey and Rebecca Ewing

Starring: Nina Dobrev, Jimmy O. Yang, Darren Barnet and Matty Finochio

Well here we are with our second holiday entrant of the year, and it’s yet another one produced by Netflix: Love Hard. 

Nina Dobrev is Natalie, an East-coaster who earns a living writing about her miserable dating life, which is a series of epic misfires. Then she swipes on Josh, and the two strike up an immediate connection. Without ever meeting in person, Natalie is certain she has found the man of her dreams. He’s intelligent, drop-dead gorgeous and single…what’s not to like? 

So smitten is Natalie that she does what any normal girl in her situation would do: Boards a plane and travels 3000 miles to surprise Josh around Christmastime. She immediately learns that Josh isn’t who he says he is - instead, he used the picture of his good looking friend, Tag, to lure women to his profile. The two strike up an uneasy agreement: They will pose as an engaged couple, as long as Josh hooks her up with Tag.

On the surface, Tag is the perfect guy, and Natalie is sure that he is the one for her. But should she follow the man she fell for over text - Josh - or the man who merely looks good? (Unfortunately here, she can’t choose both.)

As expected, this one packs in as many holiday rom-com tropes as possible: Josh is in the shadow of his successful, and married, brother; he works for his parents, but is too afraid to tell them he wants to do his own thing; the “fake” engagement; Natalie’s final revelation; the woman who misses everything right under her nose; the jealous friend; and too many more to count. It’s as formulaic as they come, but then again, that’s what everyone is hoping for and expecting this time of year. 

At least this one is TV-MA, meaning it is only suitable for adults. However, before you get excited with thoughts of seeing Nina Dobrev naked, or a lesbian tryst that comes out of nowhere just because that’s more your style, the rating is solely for language. Still it’s nice to see this kind of cheesy junk upping the ante and becoming at least a little more envelope-pushing, probably in an attempt to sucker in people who normally wouldn’t care about holiday fare (though it’s at the risk of alienating grandma).

I know “progressive” is here to stay, and I’m all for it, but Natalie and Josh feel like a more awkward, unbelievable pairing that I may have ever seen in a romance movie. It’s not that Josh isn’t likable, it’s just that he’s…not attractive. I hate to say it, but come on, the biggest appeal of these movies is to watch two cute people fall in love. Remove the “cute” from the equation and you’re just left with a tired retread of millions of other movies that contain no reasons for you to even watch it. And as shallow as it makes me sound, think about it: You know I’m right. He does have a great personality, and I do enjoy his character, but there’s just no way this relationship would ever work in the real world, because not only is Josh out of her league, but he also doesn’t have any money.

The cast is uniformly likable, and turn in performances appropriate of this kind of genre fare. Unfortunately, Kerry, Natalie’s best friend from LA, is completely wasted: Her character is genuinely funny (and the main reason for the adult rating), but her appearances are mostly confined to the beginning before she’s completely forgotten about. What is it with these movies always having one good character who is confined to precious little screen time? It feels like that’s one of the prerequisites for getting green-lit for a romance movie these days.

At any rate, this is yet another upbeat holiday movie, although the TV-MA rating might scare away those who prefer their winter movies to be squeaky clean. Assuming you can take a little bit of language, Love Hard delivers some genuine laughs; a fun, laid-back atmosphere; and a likeable lead. It also has a charming message: That love isn’t always about looks, it’s about what’s on the inside. 

Keep that in mind as you force yourself to believe this pairing. 

RATING: 6/10

TRAILER