Dell's Good, Bad & Ugly Movie Reviews

[Senser81]

Tron
<strong>Directed by Steven Lisberger.</strong>
<em>1982. Rated PG, 96 minutes.
Cast:
Jeff Bridges
Bruce Boxleitner
David Warner
Cindy Morgan
Bernard Hughes
Dan Shor
Peter Jurasik
Tony Stephano</em>​

Kevin Flynn (Bridges) tries to hack into his former employer’s network to find proof he created the company’s biggest selling video games. In the process, he is literally sucked into the system and has to fight his way out. It’s an odd watch due to a meandering plot and dialogue convoluted with pseudo-techno jargon. The actors are indeed afterthoughts to the special fx. All the bad guys simply keep a stern look on their faces while the good guys use an expression that says either “gee willikers,” or “holy moly.” Even future Oscar-winner Jeff Bridges just looks wide-eyed and goofy most of the time. It’s just another movie in which computers try to take over the world. Ironically, it crumbles under the weight of showing off its own technology.

Still, it’s the technology that makes Tron an essential movie. By today’s standards it looks primitive and can be outdone by any teenager with a desktop at home. However, it represents the cutting edge of its day. This is the first movie by a major studio to extensively use cgi. Summer blockbusters, as we know them are often traced back to <em>Jaws</em>. However, they were changed forever by this film. As a result, <em>Tron</em>’s importance far outdistances it’s actual artistic merit.

<strong>MY SCORE: 5.5/10</strong>​

I don't know how old you are, and perhaps you are too young to be from the Commodore 64/Apple IIe generation, but Tron is the perfect movie for its time. So much happens in the movie that I don't understand how you can call the plot "meandering". And to call the dialogue "pseudo-techno jargon" misses the strongest point of the movie. One, the dialogue and technical aspects of the movie aren't some Hollywood mumbo-jumbo - its actual terminology used correctly. Two, Tron doesn't "dumb down" everything so that every other scene is a basic explanation of computers. I agree that the actors are secondary to the setting of the film, but how could they not?

You also say the technology in Tron can be outdone by a teenager. Be that as it may, Tron is still one of the most unique movies ever made. No movie since has had the same look. And today's CGI technology is different...it can't really duplicate Tron.

 

[Senser81]

Much has been made of Christian Bale’s work as Dicky. It’s well deserved, he’s magnificent.

 

[dell71]

I don't know how old you are, and perhaps you are too young to be from the Commodore 64/Apple IIe generation, but Tron is the perfect movie for its time. So much happens in the movie that I don't understand how you can call the plot "meandering". And to call the dialogue "pseudo-techno jargon" misses the strongest point of the movie. One, the dialogue and technical aspects of the movie aren't some Hollywood mumbo-jumbo - its actual terminology used correctly. Two, Tron doesn't "dumb down" everything so that every other scene is a basic explanation of computers. I agree that the actors are secondary to the setting of the film, but how could they not?

You also say the technology in Tron can be outdone by a teenager. Be that as it may, Tron is still one of the most unique movies ever made. No movie since has had the same look. And today's CGI technology is different...it can't really duplicate Tron.

I'll be 40 this summer. I'm very much of that generation. In my opinion, it is a very important movie from a technological standpoint. I just don't find the story all that appealing. Part of my crime may be that even though I'm of that generation, I had never watched Tron until about a year ago. Shame on me. From that aspect, maybe I'm jaded by all that's happened since.

 

[Senser81]

I'll be 40 this summer. I'm very much of that generation. In my opinion, it is a very important movie from a technological standpoint. I just don't find the story all that appealing. Part of my crime may be that even though I'm of that generation, I had never watched Tron until about a year ago. Shame on me. From that aspect, maybe I'm jaded by all that's happened since.

What is more appealing than a guy trying to get proper credit for creating "Space Paranoids"???

 

[wingsfan77]

When I first saw the trailer for "The Fighter" I didn't even recognize Bale, he just looked very physically different than what he has in the past, I just got around to watching it last week and I'm sad that it took me that long haha.

 

[Senser81]

The Fighter
<strong>Directed by David O. Russell.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated R, 115 minutes.
Cast:
Mark Wahlberg
Christian Bale
Amy Adams
Melissa Leo
Mickey O’Keefe
Jack McGee
Melissa McMeekin
Bianca Hunter
Frank Renzulli</em>​

Micky Ward (Wahlberg) has lost his last three fights and is at a crossroads in his professional boxing career. He is trained by his brother Dicky (Bale). Dicky is a local legend, having been a former fighter himself. He’s quick to tell anyone within earshot that he once knocked down Sugar Ray Leonard (who has a brief cameo as himself). Dicky is also extremely unreliable due to his addiction to crack. His pro career combined with his drug habit have brought him to the attention of cable network HBO. They have a camera following him around. He tells everyone they are making a documentary about his comeback, though he doesn’t seem to be working towards one. He is the center of attention, just the way he likes it. However, his demons threaten to sabotage his brother’s career.

Micky’s mom, Alice (Leo) also serves as his manager. She’s well meaning but not the best at either job. She’s often preoccupied with Dicky’s misadventures. With everyone except Dicky, she’s a domineering matriarch ruling her clan with an iron fist. In Dicky’s case, she’s a pushover. The entire family is this towards Dicky. This includes a litter of sisters. Micky’s dream of being a champion is in their hands.

The family dynamic plays itself on a loop in Micky’s life. He’s at the gym, ready to work, but his brother is nowhere to be found until hours after they were supposed to have started training. Alice gets him bad fights with little or no strategy for actually building his career. Micky’s father George (McGee) tries to be the voice of reason. He clearly sees that what’s going on isn’t benefiting his boy. Unfortunately, he’s always shouted down by Alice. Eventually, Micky has to fend for himself. More accurately, he has to have better people fend for him. When this starts to happen is when the family suspects there is a problem. How dare he go outside their numbers for support without him?

We watch this drama unfold in a fashion that feels excruciatingly real. This is where the power of <em>The Fighter</em> lies. We’re either a part of, or have known families exactly like this. If we’re a part of such a family, our empathy for Micky is boundless. If we’ve only know families like this, he has out sympathy. We wish we could save him. We root hard for Charlene (Adams) because she is obviously trying to do just that. We cheer her every action during her run-ins with Alice and the sisters.

Carrying out such a display of not always humane humanity requires great acting. This movie has it in spades. Much has been made of Christian Bale’s work as Dicky. It’s well deserved, he’s magnificent. However, it’s the battle of wills between Alice and Charlene that drives the movie. Leo and Adams each play their roles with undeniable conviction. Every rolling of the eyes, raising of the voice, expressing of concerns, swilling of a shot and puffing of a cigarette rings true. More than becoming familiar with them, we really know them. We know that they both feel they are right beyond a shadow of a doubt. In the lead, Wahlberg gives a perfectly subtle performance. When he finally explodes emotionally, it’s not some overly showy display of acting. It’s completely within the realm of how we think he would behave.

For the uninformed, this is based on a true story. I don’t think I’m spoiling anything by saying there is an eventual triumph. In this way, it’s much like hundreds of other sports movies. <em>Rocky</em> leaps to mind, for obvious reasons. So too, does <em>Invincible</em>, another Wahlberg flick and <em>The Blind Side</em>. They’re both football movies based on true stories. Those two are built one cliché after another until the inevitable feel-good finale. <em>Invincible</em> is more or less average in every way. <em>The Blind Side</em> has the benefit of a remarkable performance by Sandra Bullock. They both feel like a Hollywood version of what really happened, smoothed over and watered down. <em>The Fighter</em> utilizes many of the same conventions. Somehow though, it makes them feel much more real.

<strong>MY SCORE: 9/10</strong>​

Great writeup. I really enjoyed this movie, and I didn't think I would because how many movies about boxing can you make? On a side note, I was more sexually aroused when Amy Adams was doing the high jump than her "beddie" scene with Mark Wahlberg. Does that make me gay?

 

[dell71]

On a side note, I was more sexually aroused when Amy Adams was doing the high jump than her "beddie" scene with Mark Wahlberg. Does that make me gay?

I'm not sure what that makes you, lol.

 

[Palooza]

Great writeup. I really enjoyed this movie, and I didn't think I would because how many movies about boxing can you make? On a side note, I was more sexually aroused when Amy Adams was doing the high jump than her "beddie" scene with Mark Wahlberg. Does that make me gay?

gay...ish.

 

[Maynard]

I don't know how old you are, and perhaps you are too young to be from the Commodore 64/Apple IIe generation, but Tron is the perfect movie for its time. So much happens in the movie that I don't understand how you can call the plot "meandering". And to call the dialogue "pseudo-techno jargon" misses the strongest point of the movie. One, the dialogue and technical aspects of the movie aren't some Hollywood mumbo-jumbo - its actual terminology used correctly. Two, Tron doesn't "dumb down" everything so that every other scene is a basic explanation of computers. I agree that the actors are secondary to the setting of the film, but how could they not?

You also say the technology in Tron can be outdone by a teenager. Be that as it may, Tron is still one of the most unique movies ever made. No movie since has had the same look. And today's CGI technology is different...it can't really duplicate Tron.

agreed. I was not a fan of tron or its story, but the film, for its time and for what it was trying to do back then was great.

 

[dell71]

Tangled
<strong>Directed by Nathan Greno and Byron Howard.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG, 100 minutes.
Cast:
Mandy Moore
Zachary Levi
Donna Murphy
Ron Perlman
M. C. Gainey
Jeffrey Tambor
Brad Garrett
Richard Kiel</em>​

Once upon a time, there lived a girl at the very top of a very tall tower, controlled by a very evil woman and a very handsome man comes to rescue her. In a post-Shrek world, you’d think Disney wouldn’t be so lazy as to go with that exact setup. Yet, here we have <em>Tangled</em>. It’s the latest version of the classic fairy tale “Rapunzel.” She (Moore), of course, is the girl in the tower. The evil woman is Mother Gothel (Murphy) who kidnapped Rapunzel from her parents, the king and queen, when Rapunzel was just a baby. She does so because the girl’s impossibly long hair has special powers, providing the old lady with everlasting youth among them. Flynn Rider (Levi) is the handsome man. He gets into the tower by accident, but his role is pretty clearly defined. He is to rescue Rapunzel and make sure she lives happily ever after.

There is nothing else here, narratively. Everything simply plays out as it must. What it lacks in creative storytelling, it makes up for in comedy, action and modern sounding dialogue. It mostly works. It’s funny and in some spots, exciting. The style of dialogue and the musical numbers make it easier for its target audience to relate. For them, it’s exactly what they expected and what they wanted. For them, it’s as golden as Rapunzel’s hair. For the rest of us, it’s a fairly enjoyable time-passer. <em>Tangled</em> doesn’t really do anything wrong. It just doesn’t do anything original.

<strong>MY SCORE: 6.5/10</strong>​

 

[Rivers17ncsu]

my 4 year old nephew is obsessed with that movie and Megamind

 

[dell71]

Stomp the Yard: Homecoming
<strong>Directed by Rob Hardy.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG-13, 87 minutes.
Cast:
Collins Pennie
Kiely Williams
Pooch Hall
Stephen Boss
David Banner
Keith David
Tika Sumpter
Columbus Short
Rickey Smiley
Jasmine Guy</em>​

Dance movies are pretty much critic-proof. Take the original <em>Stomp the Yard</em>, for example. It’s largely a rip-off of <em>Drumline</em>, right down to how the climactic battle plays out. Still, it was a modest financial success and has developed a devoted following of people who won’t hear a negative word about it. The high energy routines are infectious. People enjoy dance movies, regardless of their narrative issues. This is why <em>Stomp the Yard</em> was made in the first place. It’s why lots of people still tune in to cable airings of <em>You Got Served</em> and <em>Honey</em>. It’s why there have been three <em>Step Up</em> movies. Alas, it’s why we have <em>Stomp the Yard: Homecoming</em>.

<em>Homecoming</em> is, of course, set during homecoming weekend at fictional Truth University. Our hero from the first movie, DJ (Short) has apparently movie on in life, only appearing briefly here. By the way, Short is the film’s executive producer. This time, our wayward but talented dancer is Chance (Pennie). For continuity’s sake, he’s pledging to the same fraternity DJ did in the original, the Thetas. His major issue is he owes a thug from back home a hefty sum of money after losing a battle he thinks was fixed. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out the bad guy and his cronies will be coming after him. Rap fans will recognize the bad guy is played by artist David Banner. Chance’s other issue is that even though he seems rather happy with his current girlfriend, his ex-girl that he can’t stand has come sniffing around for a roll in the hay and possibly more. Oh, there is one other thing. This is a dance movie, lest we forget. That means the Thetas are also busily preparing for the National Step Competition in which they hope to beat their arch rival fraternity, the Gammas. Yes, just like DJ was in part one, Chance isn’t so thrilled with the routine his frat brother have come up with. From there, we simply paint by numbers until our generic picture is complete.

None of this matters. Like action-flick fans looking for explosions and car chases, dance movie fans are in it for the dancing, or stepping, in this case. The stepping is a bit subpar when compared with the original movie. Budgetary constraints seem to leave it a step behind, if you will. Still, there are a few creative sequences. You get what you come for. If you’re looking for anything more, pick another movie.

<strong>MY SCORE: 3/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Edge of Darkness
<strong>Directed by Martin Campbell.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated R, 117 minutes.
Cast:
Mel Gibson
Ray Winstone
Danny Huston
Bojana Novakovic
Shawn Roberts
David Aaron Baker
Jay O. Sanders
Dennis O’Hare
Damian Young
Gbenga Akinnagbe</em>​

Det. Craven (Gibson) is about to rush his daughter Emma (Novakovic) to the hospital. Just as the two step out the front door, a gunman fires a single shot, kills her and speeds off. It’s assumed the bullet was meant for him. After all, he’s been a cop for long time and has presumably made a number of capable enemies. He’s not so sure. Maybe it was, but she’s been acting awfully strange since he picked her up earlier that evening. She wouldn’t say much about it, but seems to be going through a tough time. Physically, she’s a total wreck. Every so often, she’ll suddenly vomit. The she has a spontaneous nosebleed. That’s when dad tries to get her to the hospital. Then there is that plant she works at that does something or another with nuclear energy. Hmmm.

Our hero tells his bosses that he is going to be involved in the investigation of his little girl’s murder, regardless of policy. Oddly enough, this doesn’t involve any yelling. In fact, he doesn’t get much of a fight at all. After this, he’s got people to see, starting with Emma’s boyfriend. From there, let’s just say he meets some very interesting, wealthy and/or powerful people.

We follow Det. Craven on his crusade to serve justice. In turn, we’re rewarded with a solid thriller/mystery. After a short while, it becomes apparent who killed Emma. The mystery actually lies in figuring out why. When we get the thrills, they often start with a jolt and are pretty brutal.

Mel Gibson plays the lead with a constantly pained look on his face. He ably conveys the emotions of a grieving father, albeit on who is an action hero, but a grieving dad nonetheless. However, his attempt at a Boston area accent doesn’t work too well. Part of the problem is it sounds exaggerated. The rest of the problem is that no one else seems to be doing one at all. This makes his efforting to say things such as “cah” instead of car that much more obvious.

Gibson’s accent, and your personal feelings about him, aside, <em>Edge of Darkness</em> is a solid flick that has some easy answers, but doesn’t necessarily give us the easy ending. Because of the way it’s presented, whether or not it’s a happy one is open to debate. Luckily, even though it’s not an action flick there is just enough of it interspersed to keep us interested until we get that far.

<strong>MY SCORE: 6.5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Dinner for Schmucks
<strong>Directed by Jay Roach.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG-13, 114 minutes.
Cast:
Steve Carell
Paul Rudd
Stephanie Szostak
Zach Galifianakis
Jermaine Clement
Bruce Greenwood
Lucy Punch
Ron Livingston
Larry Wilmore</em>​

After one of his co-workers is fired, Tim (Rudd) joins the mad dash to replace the guy in hopes of a raise and a large office on the 7th floor. He comes up with an idea to potentially lure a huge client which makes himself the prime candidate for the promotion. To seal the deal, he not only has to land the client, he has to attend a very special dinner at the boss’ house. What makes it special is that it is the annual “Dinner for Winners.” The “winners” are really people that the execs at the company think are idiots. Each of them must bring one such person that they will all make fun of. At the end of the night, they give a trophy to whoever they deem is the biggest idiot. However, they call him or her the most extraordinary person and never let them in on the joke. Tim’s dilemma is that the girl he’s been practically begging to marry is appalled at the idea and wants him not to go.

To complicate matters, a person that fits the bill to a tee practically falls into his lap. In a case of neither guy paying as much attention as they should, Tim hits Barry (Carell) with his car while Barry is trying to pick up a dead mouse he’s spotted in the street. It turns out he uses the deceased critters to create his artwork. Some of it is original, some are replicas of already famous pieces of art. Think “The Mona Lisa,” only using a rodent instead of a woman. Of course, Tim invites Barry to that special dinner. From that point on, Tim’s life is turned upside down.

A huge chunk of the movie proceeds as follows: Barry does something dumb and/or presumptious with predictably catastrophic results. Tim yells at him. He tries to help fix the problem, but makes it worse. Some of it is funny, a lot of it isn’t. There is also the subplot of Tim’s girl Julie (Szostak) possibly sleeping with over-sexed and eccentric artist Kieran (Clement). Things finally take a turn for the better when we meet Barry’s boss Therman, played brilliantly by Zach Galifianakis. The intense gaze on his face and his cheesy magician’s mannerisms are perfect. Almost all of the funniest scenes in the movie involve him. This includes the “pudding” joke which has a perfectly orchestrated delayed effect.

Galifianakis doesn’t show up until late in the second act. He elevates the movie to the level of watchable, at least while he’s on the screen. He can’t make the ending acceptable, largely because we know what’s coming right from the start. The bigger issue is we can’t quite muster up the sympathy needed to make it work. We can’t because even though Barry is certainly pathetic enough, he’s not likeable enough. The problems he’s caused can’t be attribute to naivete even though that’s what we’re supposed to believe. They’re things that, if I were Tim, would’ve caused me to try and do him bodily harm. In other words, we don’t feel bad when Tim makes him feel bad. We think he deserves it. The effect on the movie is that we don’t really care how it turns out, we just want it to end.

<strong>MY SCORE: 4.5/10</strong>​

 

[manchild24]

my 4 year old nephew is obsessed with that movie and Megamind

Mine too, but its my 4 year old son.

You gotta love that lizard and horse in tangled.

 

[Buzzman]

FYI Dell, all the links on your 1st post don't work. The new server update fucked them up. Happened to me as well, but thankfully I only have a third of what you have.

 

[Maynard]

FYI Dell, all the links on your 1st post don't work. The new server update fucked them up. Happened to me as well, but thankfully I only have a third of what you have.

FYI to fix this you need to add the following to the links

forum/

example:

change this

http://www.virtualsportsdaily.com/showpost.php?p=1223298&postcount=1276

to this
http://www.virtualsportsdaily.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1223298&postcount=1276

 

[dell71]

FYI to fix this you need to add the following to the links

forum/

example:

change this

http://www.virtualsportsdaily.com/showpost.php?p=1223298&postcount=1276

to this
http://www.virtualsportsdaily.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1223298&postcount=1276

Thanx for the info. That will save me a bunch of time when I go to fix it.

 

[dell71]

Tony Manero
<strong>Directed by Pablo Larraín.</strong>
<em>2008. Rated R, 98 minutes, Spanish.
Cast:
Alfredo Castro
Paola Lattus
Héctor Morales
Amparo Noguera
Elsa Poblete</em>​

Ask movie critics to name the greatest American dance movies and they’re likely to recite the titles of films starring Fred Astaire or Gene Kelly. No offense to those classics, but in the hearts of regular folks they were dethroned in 1978 by a little movie named <em>Saturday Night Fever.</em> At the time, it was the epitome of cool. It’s arguably the absolute peak of the disco era. Thirty years later, lead character Tony Manero is still the role most associated with John Travolta.

Apparently, the fictional Manero is an icon in Chile, also. When we meet Raul (Castro) in the days shortly after the film became a global phenomenon, he’s trying to get on a cheesy TV show that’s holds look-alike contests every week. He has shown up the week they’re doing Chuck Norris. He’s told he’s in the right place because they ask people to register a week in advance. Next week they’re doing Tony Manero. Very shortly, we find out he’s also the lead dancer in a <em>SNF</em> tribute show he’s constantly rehearsing for. It’s put on at the cantina that he lives above. The rest of his troupe includes his girlfriend, her daughter and the daughter’s boyfriend. Of course, he plays Manero. Seemingly, once a day he makes it down to the local movie theater which is currently running <em>SNF</em>. Clearly, he’s obsessed.

Raul’s obsession of choice, combined with the fact that he’s over 50 years old might seem a bit off putting. However, its just quirky enough to root for. What works against him, because it mortifies us, is that he’s a bad guy. I mean, he’s really a bad guy. His fixation on becoming the best Tony Manero he can be drives him to nearly unfathomable depths. Suffice it to say, as far as he’s concerned, murder is always a viable option. There is a political element at work here, as well. It is set during the early days of the Pinochet dictatorship. The director, Pablo Larraín, is known to be critical of his own culture. In this instance, could he implying that his people’s fixation on western culture is unhealthy?

The small dance troupe, plus the lady that owns the cantina make up Raul’s inner-circle. They’ve no idea of the atrocities he’s committing against the local population, but he’s hardly nice to them, either. He’s brooding, self-centered and has a hair-trigger temper. Still, the women involved pretty much throw themselves at him. It makes some sense because they’re a tight, if often bickering unit. We get the impression these ladies a) are horny and b) don’t get out as much as they used to. This makes him the most viable option. He soaks it all in, remorselessly doing whatever he pleases. Ironically, this doesn’t include actual sex. Despite his best efforts, we see him fail, time and again, in graphically miserable fashion. Another stab at our decadent lifestyle, perhaps? Maybe, this is a dig at those in power in Chile at the time. Both?

Through it all, the focus on his goal remains. The contest Raul wants so badly to win is rapidly approaching and the man he wants so badly to be is fleeting. The steps he takes toward achieving both goals repulses us. However, because of those steps his determination is almost admirable. He comes to define the word antihero. Possible politics aside, this a truly fascinating character study. When the credits roll, we’re not completely sure how we feel about it even though we know how we <em>should</em> feel. It seems Raul has much more in common with another 70s American movie icon, Travis Bickle of <em>Taxi Driver</em>.

<strong>MY SCORE: 9/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

The Nanny Diaries
<strong>Directed by Shari Springer Berman and Robert Pulcini.</strong>
<em>2007. Rated PG-13, 106 minutes.
Cast:
Scarlett Johansson
Laura Linney
Chris Evans
Paul Giamatti
Donna Murphy
Nicholas Reese Art
Alicia Keys</em>​

Every once in a while, you go into a movie fearing the worse and are pleasantly surprised. <em>The Nanny Diaries</em> is one such movie. Charged with picking out “something for everyone,” I settled on this, as it seemed to be the sort of flick my girls would like. “My girls” consists of my wife and two daughters. With my son away at a friend’s, I’m severely outnumbered, in terms of gender. This was not the time to pluck a testosterone fueled adventure from the shelf.

Our tale begins with Annie (Johansson) graduating from college. She’s more than a little unsure what she’s going to do in “the real world.” As luck would have it, she quite literally stumbles into a job as a live-in nanny to a very wealthy family on New York’s Upper East Side. Actually, calling her a nanny is understating her job quite a bit. She is more like a post-natal surrogate mother. She merely has to do everything for Grayer (Art), the little boy she nannies. Dad (Giamatti) is almost always on a business trip. Somehow, he’s still absent even on those rare occasions he’s actually in the same room as his son. Mom (Linney) dictates all activities but doesn’t participate. Apparently, she just can’t do with less than 12 hours of “me time” every day. As a result, “me time” is something Annie finds hard to come by. On top of that, she’s lying to her own mother (Murphy), whom she is hiding her occupation from. Then there’s Harvard Hottie (Evans). He’s the handsome rich guy who lives on the 12th floor and has taken a liking to Annie.

Johansson acquits herself nicely in the lead role. However, it’s Linney’s excellent turn as the control freak mom that drives the movie. She’s oblivious to her own villainy and operates through the fog of pain she’s trying desperately not to show. Her self-worth hinges on the two men in her life, her husband and son. Their failures, both real and imagined, keep her teetering on the edge of full blown depression. Linney plays it perfectly.

<em>TND</em> could’ve settled on the slapstick and pratfalls that mark Annie’s first day at work. Luckily, it finds its brain going forward. Perhaps, this makes it less funny, producing fewer laughs. However, it also makes it smarter, more enjoyable. When we get to the end, even though it’s fairly predictable, it’s somewhat satisfying. It doesn’t feel rushed or seem to come in out of left field. It also says what we’ve been dying to say for the last hour leading up to this.

<strong>MY SCORE: 6/10</strong>​