willspencer3
Joined Sep 2024
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews4
willspencer3's rating
This is so awful this legitimately made me raise my rating on the first one simply to show how much of a drop in quality there was. I already had the first movie at a completely boring and unspecial 2/10, but this is at least three, maybe four times worse than that.
In hindsight, it's actually giving me things to appreciate about the first movie, like at least they knew how to have some production value, at least they had some stunts, at least they put up some movie lights and weren't just using all of the house lights that were already at the hotel, at least they knew how to direct the camera and grade the footage in a way that didn't feel like a cheap local commercial filmed on an iPhone, and this is insane because I've always hated the first movie.
The first one came out when I was twelve, which is like the prime age to appreciate this type of Adam Sandler/Happy Madison movie, but not only did I hate it, but pretty much every person I knew at school also hated it, or at best, didn't care for it. It wasn't just me, most twelve year olds I knew hated it. The first movie is so bad that it aimed for such a low target audience, but it couldn't even succeed at that, and yet it still somehow succeeded waaaaaaaaay more that this did. This is actually so bad, I'm shocked this isn't direct-to-DVD. The production values are just that bad.
In hindsight, it's actually giving me things to appreciate about the first movie, like at least they knew how to have some production value, at least they had some stunts, at least they put up some movie lights and weren't just using all of the house lights that were already at the hotel, at least they knew how to direct the camera and grade the footage in a way that didn't feel like a cheap local commercial filmed on an iPhone, and this is insane because I've always hated the first movie.
The first one came out when I was twelve, which is like the prime age to appreciate this type of Adam Sandler/Happy Madison movie, but not only did I hate it, but pretty much every person I knew at school also hated it, or at best, didn't care for it. It wasn't just me, most twelve year olds I knew hated it. The first movie is so bad that it aimed for such a low target audience, but it couldn't even succeed at that, and yet it still somehow succeeded waaaaaaaaay more that this did. This is actually so bad, I'm shocked this isn't direct-to-DVD. The production values are just that bad.
Between this and my hatred of "The I. T. Crowd" I controversially think the show is nearly as intolerable as "The Big Bang Theory" and that's not even counting all of Graham Linehan's anti-trans nonsense, this only shows that Richard Ayoade is completely thrown off by having to use a live studio audience. They nearly destroy all sense of timing and subtlety in his style of comedy, and for something that's supposed to be a send-up of bad talk shows, it's bizarre the worst part of all of them was presented 100% sincerely.
Well, that, and there's a criminal under-use of Matt Berry in this. Sally Hawkins, too.
Well, that, and there's a criminal under-use of Matt Berry in this. Sally Hawkins, too.
I'm not joking when I say this: I accidentally paused this at one point, and it legitimately took me ten full minutes to realize it had happened.
I like it when people hold on shots and have a slow pace when it's in service of an atmosphere, and not when it's blatant padding for your paltry and underdeveloped 77 minute long runtime. As much as I complain that most movies should shoot for the 90 minute mark, the ones that can't even make it up to there tend to be some of the most boring films ever made. This is like that. It's not scary. I fell asleep once or maybe twice. I finished it and didn't remember any if it days after.
I like it when people hold on shots and have a slow pace when it's in service of an atmosphere, and not when it's blatant padding for your paltry and underdeveloped 77 minute long runtime. As much as I complain that most movies should shoot for the 90 minute mark, the ones that can't even make it up to there tend to be some of the most boring films ever made. This is like that. It's not scary. I fell asleep once or maybe twice. I finished it and didn't remember any if it days after.