Vacation (2015)

Saying that I was disappointed in Vacation is like saying I was disappointed in the Taco Bell I got at 2 AM on a Saturday. I wasn't expecting much. Even with lowered expectations and a beer before the movie (so, yes, I was in a good mood), I felt that Vacation was still a giant waste of time.

I guess I should start with the cast. I like Ed Helms a lot, but I don't think he was right for the role. He's too sincere when it would have been better to have someone a little darker or with more of a sarcastic edge. It also doesn't help that he looks nothing like an older Anthony Michael Hall. Yes, he's playing the same Rusty Griswold from the original Vacation. In fact, I don't know why they just didn't get Hall to play the role. I'm pretty sure he's available. Leslie Mann was better cast as the older Audrey, but she's only in one part of the movie. I didn't mind Chris Hemsworth's attempt at comedy, but I can't say the same for his attempt at a Texan accent. Lastly, it's a shame they didn't give Christina Applegate more to do as she seemed like the only person that was really into it.

Oh, there is a cameo by Chevy Chase, but it only served to show how little he has left in the tank. He as shaky and unfunny. Beverly D'Angelo still looked good though, but she has like two lines of dialog. Their entire scene felt added on just for nostalgia's sake.

The other big problem with Vacation is that it's just not that funny. There's a few chuckles, but nothing made me laugh out loud. The funniest part of the movie was the opening credits, which was just a montage of awkward, random family vacation photos. This isn't even something out of the script or story. I think most people will get the biggest kick out of the younger brother constantly bullying the older brother, but that's a one-note gag that plays out by about the halfway mark. Most of the other humor comes out of crude bodily humor, or awkward behavior or dialog.

Vacation features two of my biggest pet peeves in comedy, the guy that gets walked all over for most of the film (basically the same role Helms played in The Hangover), and jokes hinging around something that's impossible. Like, there's a scene where they hit a button on their fake car (which already has enough design flaws that there's no way it could possibly exist) that causes all of the windows to explode. Even the characters remark as to why that would happen, but just because you point out that fact in the movie doesn't make it funny. It's still stupid. They try to redo the famous Christie Brinkley scene where the punchline is that she's brutally killed in a head-on collision. Can someone explain to me how that's funny on any level?

There's really nothing more I can say about Vacation. It's definitely not worth seeing in the theater, and I'm having a hard time saying it's worth seeing at all. Just stick to the original and Christmas Vacation and forget that they even attempted another sequel.

1 (out of 5) Death Stars

We're the Millers (2013)

In the not too distant past, I've often often lamented seeing movies late in the Summer.  I know I've mentioned this before, but August and September are usually the dumping grounds for stuff the studios don't think can compete or hold up against the blockbusters.  However, there's been a recent trend of films I've looked forward to, or even enjoyed more than the bigger films of Summer.  I don't know if it's that they aren't marketed well, simply fly under the radar, or the Summer has become so saturated that otherwise decent movies are getting pushed back.  We're the Millers continues this trend.

The trailer for We're the Millers actually had me rolling my eyes at the premise a bit, but it worked in the context of the film.  David (Jason Sudeikis) is a small-time, successful drug dealer in Denver, but he gets into a little trouble with his supplier, Brad (Ed Helms), after a robbery.  Brad makes a him a deal: smuggle some drugs across the border and he'll wipe the slate clean.  When struggling for a way to pull this off, David is inspired by a family in a mobile home.  He figures that if he can pull off the appearance of a squeaky clean family, the border patrol won't give them another look.  David doesn't have a family though, so he recruits a dorky kid in his building, Kenny (Will Poulter); a runaway, Casey (Emma Roberts); and finally a stripper, Rose (Jennifer Aniston).  David and Rose have butt heads in the past, so she wants no part of the plan, but reluctantly comes along when she runs into money trouble of her own.

Once they make it to Mexico, they find that the 'smidge' of marijuana they thought they were picking up is actually a huge amount.  Brad also neglected to mention that the pot wasn't meant for them in the first place, so now a drug lord (Tomer Sisley) is after them to get it back.  Does drug smuggling in movies ever go off without a hitch?  If actual drug smuggling was this much of a pain in the ass, I'm at a loss as to why anyone would even try it anymore.

Along the way, the Millers meet up with the Fitzgeralds, a seemingly straight-laced couple played by Nick Offerman and Kathryn Hahn.  If you've seen the trailers, you already know that there's more to them.  I was a little worried about how their characters were going to play out, but I thought Offerman and Hahn were both funny.  I don't think Nick Offerman can do anything wrong at this point though.  Would someone please write a movie with Offerman as the lead?  I'd go for a Ron Swanson movie.

It's a high-concept film, but it's an example of when you assemble a great cast that has good chemistry, and they sell the material, it can work.  Jason Sudeikis is perfect for this type of film with his smart-ass delivery, and he carries Millers well.  I've always enjoyed when he goes into full-on 'dick mode'.  I even got a little bit of Clark Griswald from him, particularly towards the end.  Jennifer Aniston played off Sudeikis well, and showed that she still has her comedy chops after all these years.  Has it really been almost ten years since Friends ended?  Anyway, I like when she doesn't play it safe or plays against type, like she did in Horrible Bosses.  Plus, I'd like to drink from the same fountain of youth that she's been drinking from.  Although, if you pay attention closely, you'll see a body double was used in a few shots.  It's a dead giveaway whenever they cut away and it comes back to a shot of the backside or their head is no longer in the frame.  This isn't meant to be a slam on Aniston or the film, but just an observation.

I also enjoyed Emma Roberts and Will Poulter as the rest of the 'family'.  It was nice to see that they were actually given their own arcs, rather than be throwaway characters without any depth.  You're given reason to care about the Millers, and it's believable why they would bond in such a short time.  You'll also see from the outtakes during the credits that the cast clearly had a lot fun making We're the Millers and I think that comes across in the final product.

There are a few cameos from recognizable comedy actors.  I especially enjoyed Ken Marino as Rose's boss at the strip club, and he has few great lines.  Luis Guzman and Thomas Lennon also appear.  While in a smaller role, I got a kick out of Ed Helms, who seemed to be really enjoying himself playing more of a douchebag that we're used to seeing.

While I didn't find myself rolling on the floor, there were plenty of good laugh-out-loud moments throughout.  I generally like snarky, sarcastic dialog and this is full of it.  There's something about the character interaction I found natural, but maybe it's because I tend to a pretty sarcastic guy myself.  There are some siller and raunchier moments, but I felt it all balanced out nicely.  We're the Millers is also an example of why I appreciate an R-rated comedy simply for the fact that the trailer can't ruin a lot of the better lines and moments.

Directed by Rawson Marshall Thurber (try saying that name five times fast), he allowed the cast enough room to play around a little.  He also kept the pace moving at a good clip, as I didn't realize that this clocks in at 110 minutes.  That's usually around the point where I start feeling a movie's length, especially with a predictable comedy, but I didn't notice until after.  Thurber was the director of Dodgeball, as well as the old Terry Tate, Office Linebacker short, so I'm surprised to see that he's been inactive in recent years.  Here's to hoping he gets more shots at directing comedy.

I was also surprised to see there were four writers (Bob Fisher, Steve Faber, Sean Anders, and John Morris).  That many is usually a bad sign, but it didn't seem to hurt the film too much.  Fisher and Faber are credited with the story, so I wonder if Anders and Morris were brought in to punch it up.  Collectively these guys have written films like Wedding Crashers, Hot Tub Time Machine, Sex Drive, and She's Out of My League, so the comedy pedigree is there.

As I mentioned earlier, We're the Millers is predictable and gets a little cheesy towards the end.  It wraps up a little too cleanly, and there are a few spots in the story where the Millers are let off the hook by convenience.  They also had to show that even though David is a drug dealer, he has rules like he won't sell to kids.  Had they been able to stay away from some of the standard cliches or take some chances, it could have been a real stand out.

It doesn't reinvent the wheel, but We're the Millers has enough laughs to still be a good time at the movies.  Jason Sudeikis and Jennifer Aniston are a duo that works well together, and despite the predictable and cliched plot, it hits way more than it misses.  I recommend it as a matinee.

3 (out of 5) Death Stars

The Hangover Part III (2013)

Just like real hangovers, the more you have them, the less fun they become...

After the lazy, disappointment that was The Hangover Part II, I heard many reports from people involved in the production of The Hangover Part III that we'd be getting a much different story this time around, as opposed to yet another rehash of the first (which Part II was).  While Part III is finally a different story than either Part I or Part II, that doesn't mean it delivers on the fun or laughs promised.

The Hangover franchise is a perfect example of trying to squeeze blood (money) from a stone. The first Hangover was a perfectly-contained, raunchy comedy.  There simply wasn't a need for a sequel.  There were no unanswered questions that we needed to revisit in later chapters, and we didn't catch up with these guys to see how their lives turned out.  It's one of the reasons why there's not much of a story in either of the sequels.

Case in point, the main plot of Part III has more to do with Leslie Chow (Ken Jeong) than it does with The Wolfpack.  Chow wasn't much more than a side character in the first film.  Hell, the movie doesn't even revolve around the premise of these guys recovering from a hangover and trying to piece together the previous night.  It's more of an attempt to refer back to events of the first film and close the circle.

After the death of his father, Alan's (Zach Galifianakis) friends and family stage an intervention.  He's been off his meds for a while and needs help.  While driving him to a care facility, The Wolfpack is attacked and kidnapped by a mob boss (John Goodman), who wants them to track down Chow.  Chow has stolen a large amount of gold from him, and thinks The Wolfpack are the only ones that can find him.  Why a mob boss would force these doofuses to track Chow down instead of using his own henchmen is beyond me, but whatever.

The Wolfpack spends the rest of the film catching up to Chow.  They don't even end up in Vegas until almost the very end.

The most disappointing aspect of Part III was the lack of humor.  Sure, there are a few chuckles here and there, but otherwise, there just isn't that much to laugh at.  It's more of a action movie, with a few comic elements thrown in.  Many of the biggest laughs in the movie come from longer versions of what you've already seen in the trailer.  So, if you really love that scene where Zach Galifianakis is singing at the funeral, or when he cries at his intervention, you can look forward much longer versions of those.  The giraffe scene played out a little differently than I expected though, and that was probably the biggest laugh of the movie for me.  Unfortunately, that was the opening scene of the film.  I've always said that hallmark of a good comedy is quotability, and this definitely lacks that.  It's actually pretty forgettable.

The rest of the film is Alan saying weird stuff, and Stu (Ed Helms) and Phil (Bradley Cooper) reacting to either him or Chow's antics.  This leads to another big problem I had, which is after three films you can only conclude that Alan really is an awful person.  Granted, he's mentally ill, but there's no reason for these guys to be friends with him.  There's a scene of him involving a kid that I found a little disgusting and not in a raunchy way.  It just illustrated to me what a terrible person Alan is.  Don't get me wrong, awful characters sometimes make for the best comedy, but the schtick has gotten old.

I don't know why director Todd Phillips, who also co-wrote with Part II writer Craig Mazin, didn't bring back the original writers of The Hangover (Jon Lucas and Scott Moore) to give this film the energy it desperately needed.  It's clear they didn't know what to do with these characters, and the script desperately needed some punch up.

Most of original cast returns, along with a few cameos.  Forgotten member of The Wolfpack, Justin Bartha, once again is barely in it.  Poor guy, he never gets to have any of the fun.  Then again, maybe it's better that that nobody will remember his involvement in this series.

There's a short scene after the credits start (which actually was kind of funny and makes you wish the movie would have followed that story more), but nothing else, so there's no need to stay to the end of the credits.

The Wolfpack disappoints again.  The Hangover Part III is yet another uninspired sequel to a film I used to love.  It's not so bad that it made me angry, but it's just not that funny or even entertaining.  It's missing all the energy of Part I or even Part II.  Part III is a movie that I have no desire to ever watch again.  Hopefully, this really is the last of the series. I know you guys probably really want to see this, but save your money and wait for rental.

2 (out of 5) Death Stars

Jeff, Who Lives at Home - Movie Review

When a movie starts with the main character waxing philosophic about the movie Signs, you first know that marijuana must be involved, but that you might be in for a film that's a little bit different.

The movie follows Jeff (Jason Segel), who...wait for it...still lives at home.  Shocker, I know!  Jeff spends his days smoking pot and hanging out in the basement of his mother's house.  While you might think that Jeff is a slacker or loser (and you wouldn't be wrong), he's struggling with figuring out what he's supposed to do with his life and his place in the universe.  Aren't we all?

It's his mother's birthday and the only thing she wants from Jeff is to pick up some wood glue and fix a shutter.  Before Jeff finally leaves the house, he receives a wrong number from someone looking for "Kevin" and this name gets stuck in his brain.  As Jeff believes that there are no wrong numbers, he considers this to be a sign and looks for clues as he heads out of the house.  While following wherever these clues take him, he randomly runs into his older brother, Pat (Ed Helms).

Pat has his own problems in that he's in a marriage that struggling and doesn't seem to listen to anyone.  The biggest example of this is that against everyone's better judgement he buys a Porsche he can't afford.  Anyway, after Jeff and Pat run into each other, they happen to notice Pat's wife, Linda (Judy Greer), with another man.  They then follow Linda around and try to figure out what she's up to.

The story continues to build as they follow Linda and the signs that the universe is presenting Jeff.  The movie always feels like it's moving along and building to a resolution.  It's on the shorter side, as it's only 83 minutes and the events take place over just a single day.  

The main thing that helps make the movie work is that despite each character's flaws, they still come off as human and likable.  Jason Segel portrays Jeff with such a sweet naivete that when bad things happen to him in the movie, it really breaks your heart.  While it's a smaller cast, everyone is very good.  Jeff's mom, played by Susan Sarandon, has her own subplot involving her trying to find out the identity of a secret admirer from her work.  Maybe it's just me, but I still find her sexy as hell.

Jeff, Who Lives at Home was written and directed by Jay and Mark Duplass.  Mark Duplass you may know from his role as 'Pete' on The League.  His wife, and The League co-star, Katie Aselton, has a small cameo in the movie.  I don't think this was as strong as their previous offering, 2010's Cyrus, and I still thought it was a little too 'mumblecore'-ish.  For a a movie that's is short as it is, it did feel like it dragged in a few parts and could have been a little funnier, rather than feel so improvised.  That's not to say it isn't funny though.  I found many things to laugh at throughout the movie.

I wanted to mention that I thought Michael Andrews score was interesting and added to the kind of quirky nature of the film.

While I liked Jeff, Who Lives at Home, I kind of feel a little disappointed at the same time.  Considering the cast and the previous works of the Duplass Brothers, I was just expecting a little more out of it as far as pure comedy.  I do think it's a very sweet movie with a nice message about keeping an open mind, looking for signs and trying to figure out your destiny.  I give it credit for making me care about the characters and actually feel something.  Because of those qualities, it manages to stand out from other comedies.  Due to its shorter length though, I think it's better suited for a rental.

3.5 (out of 5) Death Stars