Change Your Image
CranberriAppl
Reviews
A Christmas to Savour (2021)
Meh...another unlikeable lead
Text: Why do Lifetime and Hallmark think we want to see characters like Scarlett? Arrogant, snobby, with a failing business, but we're supposed to root for the person who can't grasp that others are affected by her stubbornness and refusal to change? Enough. Not only is she a bland, off-putting character, but the story is weak. Even with Christmas movies being predictable 99% of the time, if a lead wasn't so ugh, we could let the plot slide. She's utterly awful.
Next, is the romance in the room with us? For some reason, Lifetime cannot do romance and they may have one believable Christmas romance a year. Usually those movies will involve actresses you've heard of like Tia Mowry-Hardrict, Tatyana Ali, and Jana Kramer. The budding romance between Scarlett and James (?) is not there at all. Her attitude is so poor, why would he be interested in her? Why are these personalities never a turn off? I also don't like how she treats her business parter and presumed best friend. As if her opinion on the restaurant doesn't matter. Honestly, this might have been better as A Christmas Carol story or something similar where she actually has to experience and reflect on the consequences of her actions.
I know it's a 3 yr old movie but I hadn't seen it before today. It'll be the first and last time.
This Time Each Year (2024)
Was this supposed to be funny?
Even for Hallmark, why would lying to the mom be a smart thing to do? Why do so many of these movies start with a lie? Maybe if they didn't have a child already ten months into the separation, they wouldn't come off so selfish. How would that have been anything but confusing for him? On top of asking him to play along. That alone nearly put me off the whole movie and I find it hard to believe that if she'd talked to her grandson at all in the last year that he didn't say something that would clue her into his home life.
I knew right away that Kevin meant he lost his driver's license but I agree that with the movies they've had over the last couple of years, HM not being willing to call him an alcoholic outright is rich. I also noticed that the movie doesn't have him attend meetings or mention them so they were clearly trying to dance around the subject for whatever reason. Why would a bar be the only place he could find a job? Why would his boss think it was a good idea to fire him right before Christmas bc he didn't want to be responsible for a relapse? Huh? Why hire him in the first place then. Why ask an addict to lie and pretend everything was fine?
What was up with the house? If it was supposed to be a metaphor for their broken relationship that just needed repairs then it didn't hit the mark. This story had too many threads for them to reach a resolution to everything in mere days. The house, Kevin's job loss, his potential for relapse, the dad having health issues. It was a lot. Sometimes simpler is better.
Cranberry Christmas and A Mrs Miracle's Christmas are movies that deal with relationship crises in a much more believable, focused, and logical way with all the standard Hallmark Christmas trimmings. In those movies, both couples had struggles but nothing that couldn't be handled with proper communication. This movie lost me with the plan to lie as if it made sense. I get trying to take a more serious tone, but imo when you add elements like divorce/separation or addiction, one would think the writing would take better care of such subjects. Again it might have been more tolerable (but still not great) if they didn't have a young son.
Lastly, I am sure we all know by now about the longtime casting director's lawsuit. Her name is in so many credits for the network that it probably has merit. That said, most of their "veterans" are 40 and up. I just turned 41 so watching a romcom with 23 year olds is not something I'm likely to do, but can we grow up the stories for the older cast please? I don't think this story would be appealing for 30 year olds but it definitely is not appealing to have 40-45 year old actors acting so immature. I think without the lying and the alcoholism (since they purposely didn't call it that), this could have been a story of rediscovery and the redeeming power of love after the trials of life.
Niall and Ally deserve better. They both have better films and I'm one who prefers the Miracles of Christmas to Countdown. I looked at the writer's imdb and she's done several of the Hannah Swenson and Murder She Baked movies so perhaps Allison likes her work. I just wasn't feeling this. Understand what I'm saying.... I do NOT want a movie that is so drab and
Something positive. I loved the scenes with Kevin and his brother. They played bffs and teammates in Frozen in Love so it was nice to see them again.
Please go back to new movies only after Thanksgiving. Maybe beginning on December 1st. Perhaps fewer movies will help the quality.
Five stars only for Niall and Allison.
Grizzly Man (2005)
A natural conclusion
Grizzly Man
Try not to think about how if not for TT those bears would have lived.
It was a good call to not further exploit by airing the audio of the deaths. However, to hear the coroner describe the tape and the remains was pretty dark. I'm actually quite surprised that his girlfriend's family did not object to the inclusion of such a telling of her death.
Some of it is hokey and awkward. For example when Franc(a lawyer?) delivers the watch to the ex. Maybe it was the presence of the camera but it just seemed like it didn't need to be filmed. There was awkward silence that made me uncomfortable. The spreading of his ashes by a woman that was totally never his girlfriend was also very awkward.
I also just have a distrust of anyone in the film space, be it an actor or director, seeming to display emotion when they know they're being filmed. Filming WH listen to the tape while the ex-gf and beneficiary of all of TT's belongings observed, somehow didn't feel as gut-wrenching as it may have been intended. Did she know Herzog prior to this? While I understand her presumed apprehension at listening, his listening to something deeply personal but then telling her to destroy it was just odd.
The revelation by his father of Timothy not getting the role on Cheers was illuminating and explained so much. He wanted to be an actor, which meant he wanted attention. I'm about halfway through the documentary and I'm hoping in one of his rambling monologues that maybe he will say how he came to be this extreme of an animal lover. It almost seems like a replacement for not making it in Hollywood. Even the way he's described by nearly everyone in the documentary paints him as dramatic. I wonder what would have happened to this lifestyle if he had caught the attention of a Hollywood producer and had been offered a job? It's difficult to gauge his sincerity in a lot of ways bc he's a failed actor.
As someone who hopes to visit Alaska one day, the scenery is beautiful and majestic. The trees, the water, the bears (from a distance). I love any footage of Alaska so it's worth it for that only.
It is absolutely no shock that he came to this conclusion. It is unfortunate that Amie perished with him given her fears. Also given Timothy's journal entries may have signaled that she was leaving him as soon as her feet touched California. While she is an adult and can make her own choices, perhaps she didn't want to leave him by himself. It is horrible to think that she tried to save him by fighting off the bear.
I wish there was more of an indication of time in the videos. There's no sense of how long he was with the ex, how long he was with Amie, etc. Apparently he took other women with him prior to Amie but they are never seen on film. It's also interesting that he didn't capture Amir's experience or thoughts given they had different reactions to being in the presence of the bears. This only lends to the image of him being self-absorbed as Footage or video of what he did when not camping would have perhaps helped make him seem less kooky and less self-involved.
In spite of the narration and the interviews, I would say the film does allow one to form their own opinion of Treadwell. There does seem to be a slight agenda of Herzog to make TT seem less irresponsible, but nothing Herzog can say, film, or edit, can overshadow Timothy's own videos of himself with these wild animals.
The film is a drama in that I was constantly anticipating a bear's FAFO moment with him. You're always waiting for "the climax." His footage very clearly demonstrates he wants to be an actor. His constant "love bombing" the bears with absolutely no reciprocation made him look insane, overconfident, and frankly naive. The naming then but having fairly aggressive interactions with them. The names he gives them is intended to make them seem cuddly and domicile when that is never the case. There is a moment where he said he would die for the bears. While that sounds so noble, death by bear is obviously more violent and traumatic than what he makes himself believe.
It is horrible they died but I think it's important to not encourage others to do this. He's not Steve Irwin or even the married couple that lived with Elsa the lioness. Both who seemed to be more aware that nature always wins. These bears were almost absolutely waiting for their opportunity and what likely saved him initially was camping when they weren't anxious for food. His own unfortunate hubris allowed him to stay longer than he should have and the result while tragic was not surprising.
Even now the current scene has him talking about protesting the government and complaining about the restrictions with a group of four grown bears behind him. He's talking about respecting the bears while he's up in their faces with a camera. Who the bleep turns their backs to one much less two bears just following them along a rocky dangerous river? To know that people risked their lives for his and Amie's bodies and for him it's just f them for restricting what he can do, it's so tone deaf and selfish.
You learn more about the bears from every other experienced person in the film. I appreciate the inclusion of conservationists, Alaskans, Native Americans etc who actually live in the environment and who have a deeper respect for boundaries.
Does this need to be a Hollywood film ever? Well no. But if it were, the film would take the approach of an addict who can't do drugs, who now struggles with an addiction for attention. Treadwell would be played by Owen Wilson in his most overwrought, campy, and cringiest role.
I can almost see why Amie's family didn't participate in this. I originally somewhat agreed with another contributor that perhaps TT would not have wanted these videos. But as the film progresses, he's so performative that I'm not so sure I agree anymore.
I say none of this to disparage him or speak ill of the dead. But there was really only one way for his reckless abandon to end. It was an interesting choice to have as one of the ending scenes, the coroner further describe the destruction to the bodies followed by a shot of Timothy as he's walking away from his camera with two bears trailing him. You are literally always waiting for something to happen.
In This Our Life (1942)
"If she dies, she dies."
Finding out this was right before Now, Voyager somewhat puts how Bette Davis was behind her Jezebel days in perspective.
I always enjoy seeing Bette and Olivia in movies together. Whether they are sisters, cousins, or friends, their real-life friendship and respect for one another bleeds through even when they are being utterly toxic or evil towards each other.
It's so funny because George Brent always looks too old for Bette to me, no matter the movie. I'm only 41 but having seen a ton of classics, I have seen Bette and Olivia in enough movies to see their age progressions. Something about GB just always looks older.
This is very much a B movie and it's melodramatic but I bet this movie would have made a profit had they used B movie actors. With all of these stars, I think the expectations are high and the movie doesn't help itself in that regard. Maybe Anne Baxter and Donna Reed would have made a better Stanley and Roy. I just think the casting is too much for what the movie actually is.
I appreciate the way the movie handled Parry as a character and the situation Stanley inflicted on him. I'm black and can put these films in context of the times, but that doesn't negate the reality of a white person's word (lies) being believed over a black person's. The way Stanley lies so easily without any thought to the consequences of doing so makes her more repulsive than anything else she's done in the movie. It's actually gross to see Craig gives every benefit of the doubt to Stanley but I'm glad Roy called him on it. I would have preferred a scene at the end where he was explicitly exonerated and apologized to, but I'm not naive. It's interesting how the code of villains must get their punishment onscreen didn't fully apply when their victims are black. Also the fact that people saw the accident yet no one spoke up about seeing the driver OR took off after her when she drove away.
Roy and Craig don't really have much chemistry so perhaps allowing Bette to portray Roy instead of Stanley might have played better. Roy and Craig seem to come together through a shared jilting and betrayal, but their love never seems real. Dennis Morgan plays Peter well, but Peter could have been any actor.
The relationship and bond between Stanley and her Uncle William is....strange for sure. The book may develop it more but the movie presents it as Stanley just being spoiled and dependent on him but then it takes a turn. It doesn't play like an uncle who doesn't have children who is spoiling one more than the other. We get the gist and how it's responsible for her crash out, so I'm glad the movie didn't go too far.
It's not a stinker but it's not great. It's a movie to watch if you are a fan of the cast but beyond that, there's nothing special about it.
Never Been Chris'd (2023)
To be honest, I knew I would not like this.
Something about the previews in 2023 just didn't do it for me but I like Janel so wanted to watch. Never got around to it and I'm watching it for the first time a year later.
First off, full disclosure. I generally like Tyler. Or I don't dislike him. He's like Lacey in that you always know what you're going to get without much deviation. If I recognize the female lead or other characters, I'm more likely to watch. He's not really a draw for me (although they seem to be trying to turn him into Andrew Walker who I love). Tyler does dry humor and awkwardness. Buying him as the most desirable in high school is a huge stretch. Sorry not sorry. I realize they're trying to go younger now (I just turned 41) so idk too much about a lot of these younger new faces but maybe someone who hasn't been on HM long would have been better and there would have been an air of mystery. I'm further in the movie and I'm not sure his character even has a personality? Where are his friends?
I did not enjoy Liz and Naomi as friends. They actually don't even seem close like sisters meaning the dialogue is doing the lifting and they don't have sisterly/bff chemistry. The idea that their parents were clingy but these two aren't codependent was laughable. The overbearing moms trope is stereotypical and will probably work better in the upcoming movie with the aunts from Sabrina the Teenage Witch, but here it's unnecessary because Liz and Naomi smother each other. Liz is so nasty to her mother and honestly while Naomi does need boundaries with her mother, she comes off a lot more loving and considerate of her mom's feelings. Liz is actually fortunate that her mother supports her in spite of the treatment she doesn't deserve.
Even though they too are clingy, the Wedding Veil girls are very believable as friends who are like sisters. As were Aurora and Sally. These two come off as two people who got stuck with each other.
In what world would two friends make it through the drama of high school years with a crush on the same guy only for it to come to a head in their mid 30s? And in such a cringe way? Why aren't they past this?
Also not doing things on your own bc of your antisocial bestie and trying to make her feel better about being antisocial is not a flex. Particularly when you've been doing it for 20 years. It's actually a terrible message. Naomi gets a real kiss from Chris right after Liz fantasized about it yet she lies about how it felt. The way they drag their parents you would think these two never lied to each other.
And at the risk of making 41 sound old (it's not which I would totally go back to tell my 10 year old self), I've been watching these movies since the days of only one every few months. Probably 20 years now. I've always loved Christmas movies and tv movies in general but I don't understand the constant appeal of going back to high school in them for multiple movies a season?? I loved high school. Got to travel internationally, played sports and was in the band and was fortunate to have a lot of experiences...it was fun. I'm not trying to relive it though I still have friendships from back then. College is still a stretch but would make more sense since it's more defining of who you are. I realize it's used to create history and a jumping off point but let's try something else in 2024. By 35 real friends should be past this and as blunt as they're trying to make Liz seem, why can't she just say what she thinks?
More full disclosure, I haven't enjoyed a Hallmark Christmas season since 2021. The movies are so bad now and the plots get worse and goofier. The acting is terrible and there are so many pairings with no chemistry.
My favorite Christmas movie in the last five years from HM is Five Star Christmas. Hands down. Great cast chemistry, romance, good side stories, and slapstick humor that worked with the story. I also loved An Unexpected Christmas (Tyler same kind of character but with a defined personality). I really enjoyed Take Me Back to Christmas and Crashing Through the Snow was good. I love A Christmas to Remember, Deliver By Christmas, Christmas By Starlight, The Christmas Contest, the Mrs Miracle Christmas from 2021 and a host of others. So my taste is wide. Over the last few seasons I've realized that the ones I like the most fall under Miracles of Christmas. They just hit differently as if they put in more effort? But this was awful and I only watched it bc I had a couple of hours on an off day and wanted it off the dvr. I've got thirty minutes to go and I really want to quit.
Ugh and as I'm typing this they are airing an ad for a new 2024 movie where Tyler plays a professional football player. Get real. Lol.
I may edit this when the movie ends bc I'm not sure what the movie is saying about this friendship. Is it worth saving? Idk. I also realize I don't care.
P. S. In Right In Front of Me, Janel played a much better character who ran into a former crush. This movie was so bad. So so bad.
PSS I'm at the scene of their "big fight" and how did this friendship survive? High school, college, the ups and downs of business ownership? They've clearly held on to resentment about things since they were teenagers. It's pure codependency. Liz saying the company is hers and she shared it with Naomi but then feigning hurt when Naomi (truthfully) said she was Liz's only friend made me roll my eyes. If I had to, I'd probably choose Naomi as a friend bc at least she's pleasant and more open to new things. There's obviously some stifling in the friendship that the movie portrays as coming from Liz..
Edit: Instead of a grown up and mature conversation as friends and business partners, they decide to change things at a freaking dance. Then the movie ends. What was the point of the other people from high school? Did they even have names and they made it clear that Naomi and Liz would remain codependent so what was the shot at the end as if they were a friend group?
Don't recommend it. At all.
Switched at Birth (1999)
Linda's loneliness jeopardizing the lives of those boys
The movie attempting to draw stark comparisons between Sarah and Linda, and making Sarah seem extreme, fell flat for me. Darryl is a complete loser. LInda, just like Sarah said, just wanted a name to put on the birth certificate. Linda said that in the beginning. In fact, the only reason she even found out something was wrong was bc she couldn't let Darryl be a jerk away from the baby. Turns out she was never thinking about Luke, just herself. Did we even see a scene of just the three of them bonding in the way that Sarah/Jim/Morgan bonded? No. Literally in the beginning, my hope was that she would meet an actual nice guy, gain some self-worth, find her own place/start her own salon, etc, and Luke may have a stepdad who wanted him. She was dependent on EVERYONE in her orbit in the film and ironically, her independence came very clearly with the settlement from the hospital.
Characters like Linda irk me. Like her lack of "privilege" is supposed to make us instantly feel for her, but she is so irresponsible. But wait, she does have privilege, bc her parents and her sister filled the gap and made every way for her to do nothing but raise Luke. Gave her a home, food, daycare, and a job. Gave her stability. I loved that her dad loved little Luke so much after being utterly disappointed in his daughter. Like every scene with Darryl, you can tell she's just lonely. The whole court battle began bc Darryl decided Luke was "defective" and they wanted a "healthy" Morgan back. The way she lets him steamroll her makes me sick. He's a liar, manipulator and she just takes it in stride...because she's lonely.
This movie in some ways is the best case scenario for this kind of movie. Very saccharine, not too deep, and thankfully no one dies (like a Lifetime version of this). And who knows, switching the boys at 1 year old may have been tough, but at the same time, Sarah and Jim dealing with these two forever would be a nightmare. For me, it's not even that the quality of life is technically better and more stable for Morgan. It's that Linda is so irresponsible that I'd hate to see Luke as an older kid dealing with this dysfunction, with a father who doesn't even know his pediatrician, yet has so much to say about a kid that isn't his. It's not hard to imagine a drunk Darryl pitting the boys against each other. He had ZERO good intentions or qualities. And it's not to say Jim and Sarah are perfect. They are NOT, but it's manipulation to say their structure, order, and stability makes them bad people or deserving of losing their child.
I also hate in movies like this how the "less fortunate" one never gets told off the way she/he should be. She's so passive and I'm just like why? At what point did she decide she wanted both boys? One of who isn't even related to her? That part makes zero sense. Why would a judge give a kid not related to a pair of strangers? Linda should have focused on getting the hospital to make things right instead of letting her loneliness cause undue stress and disruption to two very young kids. Utterly stupid and I honestly don't feel sorry for her. She brought drama to her parents and her sister's lives. When he's around, she goes through scenes of not saying anything or having this pained look on her face. It's annoying as crap to be honest.
I guess it's your POV who the bigger star is in this, Gilbert or Arquette. For me, it's Gilbert being a fan of LHOtP and to me, RA is not really the face of the Arquettes. But we see less of Linda with Luke than we do Sarah with Morgan. What is this movie's point? Honestly, this is so old it doesn't matter. I'm ultimately Team Sarah bc at least she's consistent and stands up for herself. Honestly wouldn't trust Linda as far as I could throw her and as much of a hassle it would be, I would absolutely get things in writing.
Emperor of Ocean Park (2024)
Came for Forrest W....Left because of everything else.
I bought the Emperor of Ocean Park when it was first published (most likely from Waldenbooks to give an idea of how long ago) and I found it so tedious and hard to read (the language is dry). It was a thick book which was exciting bc I prefer thick epics and sagas. I was 19 and in college, but was used to reading classics, so I didn't give up. Didn't know who the author was (not sure I would have known at 19), but when I discovered he was a lawyer, it sort of made sense how dull and clinical the language felt. It got SO HARD to get into, that I purchased the audiobook and it was STILL too uninteresting to finish. Which was unfortunate, because I love dramas (all kinds of media) that revolve around families like this. There's generally so much that can be done with family dynamics: Hamlet, Romeo &Juliet, The Godfather, Empire (which was FANTASTIC...until it wasn't), Revenge, Deception (the Victor Garber short-lived one). I probably donated the book to my library, but I may still have the cds. Wow, even now I can see myself in my little Honda trying to listen to those cds wherever I went just in an attempt to get into the story.
As someone who is unaffiliated with any party, but who firmly believes what I believe, I find both stereotypes of left and right to be super cringe. It's 2024, and it's the same language we can't seem to escape on tv and social media. There are quips about Facebook that made me roll my eyes. Sometimes adding real life to dialogue sounds so fake and forced. The portrayals of politics in shows like this (especially ones that have political storylines) are always caricatures...never subtle depictions as if the audience can only understand in-your-face actions and dialogue.
The show goes back and forth, between 2009 and "present day." Present day seems to mean 2023 because one of the characters wears a shirt that says "main character energy." To show the "past," Tal and Kimmer meet and vibe over a shared love of Cash Money Records, but CMR was at their height earlier than 2009. My guess is they shifted the timeline so they could name drop Obama as much as possible. If you plan to watch, but use as background noise while not really paying attention, the time jumps are important to realize. I would have almost preferred this being a complete period piece.
One of my main issues with this show is the dialogue. No one is speaking naturally, conversationally, and it's as if the writers' goals quips and "snappy" language. I keep cringing when the sister talks bc she doesn't talk like a real person, and when Addison, played by way too old for this role Henry Simmons, speaks. Henry looks AMAZING and is aging so well, but I saw that he is 54, which doesn't even put him a decade behind Forrest. For those of us who remember him from NYPD Blue or his other earlier roles, it's a miss. Tal is played by a 90s baby.
The acting is awful. No offense, but none of the actors are who I imagined in these roles as I plodded through what little of the book I managed. Is this a result of this series probably being two decades too late? Possibly. The show goes back and forth btwn timelines and I think it was a mistake to not use younger actors. Especially since there is heavy use of said flashbacks. Again, please don't show us 50+ year old Henry S in "2009." Had this show been made around the time of the book's publication, I could see Garcelle Beauvais OR Renee Goldsberry (who might have still been on OLTL at the time) as Mariah. Both could have pulled off the icy-yet-able-to-cry character that Mariah is supposed to be. Maybe even Maia Campbell. Another name that came to me was Jill Marie Jones. Would have been perfect! Oooh or maybe even Sanaa Lathan who, I think, in the early 2000s was doing an arc on NipTuck. For all the screen time he's had thus far, I actually could see Henry in his same role. He nails arrogant oldest child. For Tal, someone like Sharif Atkins would have made me care to follow Tal's journey more. I truly don't care one bit about Tal's marriage problems particularly if they don't tie into the mystery of his father's death.
The characters are admittedly vain and entitled (they are at least self-aware) but not a single one comes off better than the other. Tal is the POV and protag, but he's so gullible and easy to push around, why am I rooting for him?? Mariah is so poorly developed. She is written as the type that is always trying to prove herself worthy which got old in the pilot. I can't tell if they're setting her up for a breakdown. They all are no doubt products of their environment and a measure of spoiling by their parents, but she's so over the top. Addison so far is meh. He's the stereotypical eldest child that doesn't really want any parts of anything complicated.
Also "the arrangements." Can we be more subtle and less sledgehammer? It was incredibly obvious that those two men that questioned Tal were not FBI agents. He's supposed to be smart and a lawyer, but he couldn't see through that? I was so embarrassed for him when he quoted a statute to those two fakes. We're supposed to believe that a former CIA agent would talk loudly and excitedly at a funeral in the open? That he would use something as generic and basic as "the arrangements" when it's clearly meant to be something only Judge Oliver, Jack, and (maybe) Tal know about? A judge and a CIA agent couldn't come up with something more creative?
I'm on episode two only because I decided to write a review of the first ep while watching. As I said, I don't like a single character, so I do not see myself sticking with this. Forrest is the draw but he's really not enough unfortunately because the story really isn't about him.
Full disclosure, I did quit the book quite early because it did not grip me, so I cannot really say how close this adaptation is for anyone wondering how faithful it is. I will say that the adaptation not only doesn't make me want to watch ten episodes, but it does not make me want to revisit the book. Also, my firestick rebooted itself during ep 3 and I haven't gone back to finish the ep.
Call Me Miss Cleo (2022)
A letdown
I don't have HBO so I actually caught this over the weekend on Lifetime after the new Miss Cleo movie. No judgment please. I foolishly assumed that this documentary would provide real insight in the true Cleo or Youree, but I was sadly mistaken. Particularly since I'd heard that the documentary was not kind to her.
I thought it was quite telling that the theater folks she scammed in Seattle got less airtime than those she clearly was still lying to in Florida. For me, this documentary would have had more credibility and balance had it been equal time to both groups with the goal of allowing the audience to see "something" was off. It also didn't seem like the glowing interviewees were challenged in any way. I don't mean badgering, but did they even ask ANY of them about the accent? If you are open and honest, that should have been the easiest thing for her to answer. I really liked how the Seattle group straight up said she did not have an accent. But then the Florida group clearly acted like none of that was part of the scam. It was so bizarre. Like come on, her daughters absolutely would know that the accent wasn't real and yet the documentary makers don't seem to make any effort to find someone during that period after PRN that wasn't falling for it. (I do not fault her kids for not participating btw). The Florida group seemed to be in some sort of codependent situation with her. All of them. Otherwise what explains being lied to to your face?
Even with the footage of her, because of the lies, scams, and never admitting it maybe gave her some sort of green light to keep going? How can anything she uttered not be given skepticism?
This leaves more questions than answers. I was ten years old when those ads started airing and thankfully my sibling and I and our cousins never called bc we all would have been grounded for life after the first phone bill. But I will say, it always seemed like a comical put on. Even at my young age and I do remember the comedy sketches and everyone walking around saying "call me now." I guess there is a certain kind of person that gets taken in by this but it just never seemed real. I didn't realize she died until Lifetime began advertising the movie so that was a shock. But I was surprised that she still tried to join another "psychic" network and she gave $100 readings. That means she learned nothing, yes? Why doesn't this documentary mention that part of her life?
Also including Raven and Debra Wilson was weird and offered absolutely nothing. Raven was obviously learning about Miss Cleo as she was interviewed and I really don't see the benefit of interviewing someone who was a child at the time, whose only connection was doing a parody. And Debra was clearly trying to be a philosopher while never acknowledging that it was all lies. They both made so many excuses for her.
Lastly, can we address the multiple elephants in the room? After the court case segment is over, the documentary switches completely to the interviewees that did nothing but make more excuses. It was honestly both pathetic and sad because in spite of their claims, if someone is using a fake accent and leaning into what's been exposed as a scam, you don't know the real them.
I don't know what I expected of this film honestly. I expected more Miss Cleo but I thought it would be more of an in-her-own-words piece. I expect that when she was alive, there was a fine line she couldn't cross lest she incriminate herself but this was still a less than satisfactory viewing.
Morok (2021)
This is in no way an 8 much less 10 star movie
This was my third attempt at the movie but I wasn't feeling well last night, so I just decided to finish it in case it actually ended up being a good movie. It was not. But now I can make sure Tubi never recommends it again.
I figured out right away that there was no baby and her mom was dead. It tries to be the Sixth Sense but plenty of actions give it away. For example, what new mom expects their infant to hold his own bottle but then walks away and shuts the door? Or doesn't open the door to check on the baby?
One of the significant issues is that the actress playing Claire doesn't not pull it off. She reminds me of Monica Potter (who can overact herself). The movie is from her POV and the bulk of the scenes are of her alone. She has one facial expression and can't sell "delusional" the way Bruce Willis did or Nicole Kidman in The Others. The phone calls with her mom were so obvious, with the tell that something was wrong being that her mom had to specifically reassure her in the voicemail.
All in all, it was so obvious there was a miscarriage so I'm not really sure what the point was trying to make it a mystery. I absolutely knew the ending before it happened. Again she is not a good enough actress to pull off delusional mind, so I rolled my eyes at the moment. It also seemed like at a point that the movie dropped the trying-to-be-the-Sixth-Sense vibe and just did whatever. I don't think there was a single shot of an empty crib when she had her final breakdown and "shattering." SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER she always seemed like she hated her husband so I was not shocked that she killed him. And the cliche getting dressed/made up scene complete with red lips and lingerie. Ugh. The husband did not deserve to die. It was clear she made up everything in her head, so what, we are supposed to sympathize with her? She was so withdrawn that even her own mother couldn't take it? I hate when soap operas do it, so I definitely don't like it in movies: if you're going to k!ll a baby and have that be the catalyst for emotional stress, please make it believable. It wasn't until very late in the movie that we even see her pregnant. The way the script and direction play out, they could have removed the baby storyline, focused on her belief he was cheating, and she could have still lost her mind. I have no interest in seeing an in progress miscarriage just because.
Also, with the movie playing with time, he obviously lashed out plenty of times in frustration (meaning about their baby being gone and her disengagement from life and their marriage) before her last psychotic break....had she been this way for eight months? Not even kidding, I wish he had loved himself more and left her to save his own emotional state and his life. Additionally, this movie really takes place over the course of maybe two hours of a morning, since a great deal of the movie takes place in the past.
We have all seen movies that do better breakdowns than this. I find sites like Tu bi are so great at finding hidden gems that need an audience. Four stars because I finally finished it. But pick something else. A lot of the dialogue also seems improvised (between Claire and Eric) but it still sounds fairly clunky and unnatural. I realize with one set, only three cast members, that the budget for this was probably super small, so I truly wasn't expecting a big budget blockbuster. But at the same time, I'm giving the movie the same attention I would a bigger film, so why can't I expect some things to be just as good?
Oh, and can we stop with the blue filter?
Even After Everything (2018)
Wasted title on an awful movie
The only ones worth anything are the kids. Every character was horrid and the acting was terrible. Not a single sympathetic one in the bunch
I honestly hoped that an earthquake or something else natural came through and got everyone but the babies.
The brother was a terrible actor and character. Unattractive and gross. Why were we supposed to care about his revenge plot against his brother? He was a criminal and a degenerate.
This is the kind of movie that is why indies have a hard time with the general public. No real plot or development. Even now as the credits roll, what was the point? The husband cheated and sucked as business but she slept with his brother making them even...then there's a time jump and all is well? Why did they stay together?
Literally no character has depth. There's no development.
Then the cringe one liners and the production probably had bets going for how many times they could say the f word and c*ck s*cker. Absolutely pathetic script.
And the arrested development daughter of the old man should have reported that David almost raped her!
Awful "film."
How to Frame a Family (2023)
Boring and not a likeable character in the bunch.
The mom is awful, Rex is awful, and the story is awful. They are supposed to be fish out of water, less fortunate than the rest, but then they have horrible attitudes that make them fit right in.
The mom is a drag with her complaints and her constant nagging. It's actually very easy to see where Rex gets his brattiness from. The acting is pretty bad and her voice is quite grating to the ears. The mom has one facial expression so if this is supposed to be some building crisis and test of her strength and bond with her son, she's not selling it. Her constant look of surprise, and her reaction to everything is "OMG," no matter the situation makes it hard to feel her life is on the verge of falling apart. Rex is, again, bratty, rude, disrespectful, and not a good actor. Nothing about him is sympathetic.
When the "thing" happens, I'm just like "who cares?" There's zero mystery, zero intrigue, and zero sense of stakes. We had plenty of "teen" movies in the 90s that dealt with consent, but the current day method of trading actual dialogue that tells a story for statistics and cliche phrases is quite cringe. It gives "a very special," but 30 years too late. It's a he said/she said, but it's not quite balanced. No one is talking like a normal person.
The mom is not very smart, why not involve the poilice in the extortion and the retracting statement? She has no proof that any of it happened.
Then the "victim" (don't come for me, they establish that she's lying about it for money) not a day later extorting the mom in the open...how dumb do they think we are? In the beginning, the movie makes it clear the mom and Rex are not wealthy, so why would this girl choose Rex to extort? Then there's a subplot of the mom doing some escorting or something? She's a school counselor.
Also, why is it so hard for tv movies like this to make police actually look like more than a mall cop? The "cops" in this movie have POLICE emblazoned across their hats, and as someone who lives in the DMV, these hats are sold on The Mall to tourists. Like, come on.
Also none of these "kids" look like high schoolers. This is a big problem with tv movies...just make them college students to help the believability.
I usually try to give tv and streaming movies some leeway because I don't believe that the big studios should be able to squeeze them out, and there are some gems out there. But this is not one of them. The movie is trying to be something the writing, acting, and directing does not support.
A Stalker in the House (2021)
FF to the end. Save yourself. No stars. Not a single one.
Dude is horrendous and a bad actor
The stalker genre is not the issue. It's how the movie leans into it that's the issue. Not once is this guy charming, sexy, attractive. Everything is UP TO ELEVEN from his first scene. He's breaking into her house, blowing up her phone, killing her neighbors, like come on. This guy has impulsively killed two people and with his personality he hasn't been caught?
My other issue is the way whatever-her-name-is portrayed. She is visibly creeped out by him from the first scene, WHY would she entertain him at all? NOTHING about this movie shows how she could be drawn to him even just for sex. They met online so already her defenses should be up. As I type this, he has killed her neighbor, broken into her home and is now sitting on her bed. What am I missing? OMG, he's touching her and she's not moving. She isn't in that deep of a sleep. This is absolute garbage and "Mike" has the most punchable face. He's quite repulsive and not in that creepy, but let's see what happens, way that Rod Steiger's Jud is obsessed with Laurie. Another question I had, and maybe I missed it, but how exactly was he tracking her movements? I don't remember a scene of him doing the typical stalker move of adding tracking software to her phone or setting up cams.
OK, sorry for the distraction. Why isn't she instinctively protecting herself? He creeped her out, but she didn't block his number? He wouldn't leave her house when she asked. She let him back in her house? Why not mail him his watch or trash it? At the risk of sounding like I'm victim blaming, the movie never gave us much in terms of her mindset. OK, she wanted to meet someone. But she had friends, so her lonliness or personality wasn't crippling. Even the lackadaisical way she hooked up with the next guy...no self-preservation? You just had a creep make himself at home in your home, and you invite the next guy like that never happened?
OMG, he has just killed two more people in broad daylight.
Pass on this one. As an avid tv movie watcher during the work day, you can absolutely do better than this by picking a Lifetime movie. There is a movie called Swindler Seduction and in that movie, the villain/swindler actually played the long game to ingratiate himself into the protagonist's life. It was truly clear how he could have charmed her and when she woke up and got rid of him, his stalking of her was actually terrifying. This guy has zero subtle qualities and there are no clues to why he's honed in on this girl.
I also think a decent subplot that would have added something to this would be if she (I seriously don't care to know her name) actually met someone in real life. You would think she would show some hesitation about the app, but the movie gives her no development at all. Oh good GRIEF. This guy has now killed two more people. Another plot point that could have added stakes was if the woman he killed in the beginning was reported missing. This dude is killing without a care in the world.
If the choice is btwn this and a shark movie (Tubi has A LOT)...choose Jaws.
The Whole Truth (2016)
A lie is not a twist."- Bob's Burgers
One of the best lines to come from the show. I love films such as Memento, Sixth Sense, The Skeleton Key, The Usual Suspects,The Others, Psycho, Fight Club, even Devil's Advocate, and several other films with the "technique" used here. The difference between those films and this one? The Whole Truth is lying to the audience.
For me, Mike refusing to talk was a dead giveaway that his mother knew something she wasn't saying. Watch enough movies and there are telltale signs. Why would a mother do this to her son? WHY? An affair is not a reason. Why would Keanu's character want him to talk so badly knowing what he could say? WHY? Who could guarantee any outcome? It's absolutely nuts that Mike would allow his mother to lie on him like this. At no point did it seem like they were aiming for a mistrial. Why would the kid shut down and refrain from speaking but have so many witnesses say they heard him say a variation of he did it? Not even hearsay that could be discarded. Did he and his SPOILERS-------co-conspirators think his age would protect him?
Keanu and Renee had zero chemistry. RZ being Loretta made it a safe assumption that the movie would have something develop between them, but even a little bit of heat between the actors might have made the lengths they went through believable. There are no signs of the intensity of the affair, the length of the affair, how the affair started. Nothing. You mean to tell me in this smallish community nobody knew about this affair? The flashback scenes to the bbq cannot be trusted because every main character is lying.
With movies such as this, the audience should be able to rewatch and see all the pieces fall in place. How the characters' previous interactions shown in the film make the climax believable. Where are the scenes between Mike and his mother? What's their actual dynamic if she would do this to him?? It is absolutely absurd that this 17 yr old kid would do this. This movie doesn't even try to make this similar to how Lana Turner's daughter's killing of her stepfather went down. Lawyer or not, Mike showing up and spoiling it means that the murder was not seamless and mistakes were made. This movie wants us to believe that no signs of R except that watch were there.
Another problem is that this movie does not involve the investigation at all. No other fingerprints found in the bedroom? On the knife? No neighbors saw Ramsay's car? Or any car over time coming and going that wasn't Boone?
I enjoy a twist. I don't enjoy a lie. By the end, what about this movie could be believed? Ramsay was an unreliable narrator so having everything from his POV calls the entire script into question. Calls even the entire "what really happened" into question. I do not like when movies have people who are co-conspirators pretend in their interactions when no one else is around (ex. Ramsay and Loretta after the acquittal). They weren't being watched. We weren't meant to believe they could be heard by anyone else. It's so phony.
I won't cape for Boone bc who really knows, but it's clear everyone in this story benefited from portraying him in the most evil of lights. It was so lame when right before his life and freedom was decided, Mike asks his mother if she was actually abused. I'm sorry, what? I also just find it disgusting whenever r8pe is used so flippantly. He and his mom don't EVER discuss it and it allegedly had been happening since he was 12! He also admitted it was a lie. This is a messy movie.
Give it a pass and find another courtroom drama. Something with more intrigue and suspense. I eventually read the wiki to find out the climax while watching. This movie wants you to believe that nothing could go wrong in this very ambitious scheme when nothing onscreen seems that tight at all. When all parties are lying for their own interests.
What was the lesson here? A better ending would have been Ramsay realizing that he may have gotten away by he hasn't gotten by. We're supposed to believe Janelle would not still be curious and noticed Ramsay slipped up somehow? That Mike would not be stewing in resentment over this bc of the stigma? That Ramsay and Loretta would live happily every after? Will either of them ever feel the walls closing in? Seems to me that as a lawyer, Ramsay should know that cases get reopened and the actual killer could still be found. This would have been worth something if it were filmed like a Twilight Zone or Alfred Hitchcock Presents episode and gave the audience something to think about. What was the point of the narration if Ramsay was lying through it? Maybe The Whole Truth is a lazy play on words.
By the end of TUS, we knew Verbal/Soze was lying. By the climax of T6S, we realize that Cole was trying to get Malcolm to see the truth. I just really didn't like this and I blame having higher expectations. It's a quick watch because nothing is actually suspenseful and you won't find rewinding to see if you missed something important.
This seems like an easy money movie for Reeves, Zellweger, Belushi, and Lucas. A cheaper cast might have helped this movie make a profit. None of these characters feel real, and none of the roles had to be portrayed by such recognizable faces. What a disappointment.
The Advocate's Devil (1997)
Meh. Thought it was a parody at first. Or a Tubi original
The best thing about this movie is that the story moves quickly. There are no real lulls. Other than that, nothing here is subtle and everything falls exactly into place and goes according to how it needs to for Abe. This movie needs the daughter to be as googly-eyed and dumb as bricks to actually accept a date from this guy. I do not buy that she is so starstruck that she doesn't get that maybe sometimes her DEFENSE ATTORNEY FATHER defends sketchy, and probably not innocent, people. Abe raised an idiot. It's hard to feel sorry for someone who acts so utterly stupid. Did she deserve it? Of course not, but she actively lied and KNEW how her dad would react to her "dating" a client. She just could not have been that enthralled with this psycho who just beat a r&pe charge. The whole thing is just too smooth. Too clever. Too convenient. It would be more believable if, as I originally thought from the short description, that it was a college athlete for whom everyone ran cover and made money off of. The daughter ignoring red flags for a guy her own age sounds more likely. Joe is an old man to her. Or should be.
I've never read the book (didn't know there was a book), but assuming the bones of this story are the same, is Dershowitz saying that all of this would be totally ok for a lawyer and an off duty cop to do? Fake warrants? Can you violate privilege in a roundabout way? Genuinely asking. Why do this for drama? The guy is obviously a sleaze, but it's just absurd that there are no obstacles to getting what they want when it's the daughter (Emily? Honestly who cares). Joe being a hacker was definitely the MacGuffin I didn't expect. The dude was a psychopath. We're supposed to believe that he would use Naismith as a password and an alias?? I was only 14 in 1997, but The Net came out in 1995. What Angela did in that movie was hacking. Even in 1997, was looking up court cases really considered hacking?
The romance between Abe and Olivia Benson is harmless until the depraved freak reveals to Emma what happened with her mother's death. Why is this here? When the daughter mentioned that Benson was a friend of her mother's, it raised my eyebrows, but why even make it an affair and then expect us to look at their scenes the same? Oh but of course, the daughter speaks for her deceased mother and gives Benson and Abe permission to continue pretending the mom didn't discover an affair. This is ridiculous. Again, convenient.
Abe's daughter understandably struggles with what happened and it has her feeling some kind of way about her father. Abe's demeanor, facial expressions, and mood never change throughout this ordeal. We don't get any sense other than words that he's struggling with what his chosen profession might have indirectly done to his daughter. He hasn't lost anything personally or professionally. The cop helping him for sure got suspended. It would have been nice to hear him question his entire career and whether or not any of his clients were like Joe. There's no reflection, no scenes of Joe by himself lost in thought. Nothing. There has yet to be a scene where he and Benson acknowledge that they had an affair. It's again. Too smooth. I was born in '83, so obviously Thirtysomethings is not a show that would have interested me, so I only have the acting in this movie to go on. Abe's acting is too stoic and constant, so it's hard to get a sense of what he feels. None of the characters feel real in fact.
This definitely feels like a tv movie. Maybe even a 3-episode arc of a 90s courtroom drama. I only turned this on because the title caught my attention on Tubi. I also love how the movie ends w/o the verdict bc how many times have we seen surprise verdicts? Obviously a conviction is the desired outcome, but when everything in this movie is just happening in the protagonist's, it's hard not to be cynical about what's onscreen. I assume Alan D's intention was to make a statement about his profession. Anatomy of a Murder, Primal Fear, The Lincoln Lawyer, and of course, Devil's Advocate are much better takes on the defense lawyer-with-a-crisis of conscience trope. I will never watch this again.
5/10 for being a quick watch.
Fatale (2020)
Not great but not awful. Watch once
Don't think too hard after watching bc the more you do, the worse the movie gets. To be honest, I had low expectations of this. I watched it on Tubi. No shade, I'm enjoying their offerings, but it gets recommended alongside the Tubi originals, so yes, I judged a book by its cover. I was expecting your basic, lazy copycat Fatal Attraction, but the movie surprised me there. This is a very violent movie. Every single character, with the exception of the little girl who never utters a word, wants another character dead. I agree with another reviewer that everyone is unlikeable. What are the chances that they're both in Vegas and from Seattle of all places. I live in the DC area, and it's not a stretch that I could run into someone from home in NYC or Philly. They're all close enough to be plausible. LA would have made more sense.
I won't rehash the meat of the plot. A lot of it was typical for a movie of this kind: blackmail, lying to hide bad behavior, compounding bad behavior, obsession, threats, etc. The ending is crap. Derrick still killed a man with a gun that wasn't his, accident or not. He went to kill him so how did he get off consequence-free? Plus, that guy was a politician. I found it completely unnecessary given that the end result was a little girl is now an orphan on top of being disabled because of her mother's recklessness. If Derrick wasn't going to be made to at least be accountable for that, then the father should not have died. My guess is the writers felt he "deserved" it because of whatever scandal he was under investigation for (honestly, the scenes regarding it happened so fast, I have no clue what it was about). He was the parent that had the child's best interest. By far that was the most undeserved and over the top death. Not to mention, Valerie seemed more interested in getting back at her ex-husband, than she was actually acknowledging what her actions did to her child.
The gotcha moment with the recording...um, ok so they're fighting and shooting it out and that phone just stayed put the whole time in his jacket? Did he not also confess to shooting her ex-husband? I don't see how that recording would just absolve him of his crime. Honestly a better twist would have been for the movie to still have the scuffle but have the gun go off and hit the wall or something. Then Derrick could return and have Val think he did it but the ex-hubs would not have been killed. I just really wasn't feeling the ending. At least til that point, all he was was a cheater. I'm in my 30s, and I watch a lot of TCM, and I admit, I am a fan of the Hays Code under certain circumstances. There's absolutely no way he would have avoided jail. Even in Leave Her to Heaven, Richard was held accountable for indirectly covering up Ellen's murder of their baby. This movie let itself down in that regard.
I'm not someone who needs a movie explained to me, but this movie could have elevated itself with some added details and maybe replacement scenes. For example, adding the exact moment (in flashback) where Valerie decided to use Derrick. Granted, he used her for sex, but it is quite the leap to go from a consensual encounter, to feeling betrayed, to wanting him to commit murder. Her behavior might have made more sense if they'd spent an entire weekend together. Ironically, the affair was technically not the catalyst for this. Well, not Derrick's affair. But his wife's with his business partner plus the partner wanting to sell, and apparently needing Derrick dead for it all, was so over the top. How did the wife and Rafe react to Hilary shooting them? Who called the police? Where were those scenes? Did the wife recognize Valerie as the detective? Additionally, while yes, her killing those two idiots at her loft was self-defense, why did they use movie magic to make it all disappear? Did she call anyone? I mean, the movie made the case seem high profile...nobody was curious? The movie should have left us with an idea how she got rid of them. One of my pet peeves is when a movie is so contained that it makes no sense.
The voiceovers with Terrance J and whoever the other voice was...pure cringe and so preachy. Had I been in the theater for this, I probably would have groaned. It would have also been nice if in the dialogue wrap up, they'd mentioned that maybe all of Valerie's cases were being looked into. Even her death was cliche. I think a far worse fate for her would have been going to jail for life knowing that she'd never see her daughter again.
All in all, this movie is not Oscar-quality but not quite Razzie worthy either. It does beg to question how they hooked Swank. Maybe on paper the character was interesting, but again, it's not art, it's not Fatal Attraction, it's not Play Misty for Me. I also believe both Mikes could do better than this. The is a streaming quality film and it makes zero sense that this was put in theaters during C-you know what.
As an aside, Mike Colter's character's name made me laugh. Someone was clearly a fan of the soap opera Port Charles and The Walking Dead.
5/10 because I finished it. I took away a star due to the ending.
My Boys (2006)
I watched during the og run...it was decent, but all these years later...
I would never sit through a show with such a Mary Sue like PJ again. You gotta suspend your disbelief quite often in this show, and I can admit that now. PJ has ZERO chemistry with every single guy she dates, she has no sex appeal (even though the show tries), but she's supposed to be the most desirable on this entire show. Even more than Elsa or any of Brendan's girlfriends (PJ hates them all btw, but she couldn't handle the guys not liking Hank or Evan).
I grew up a tomboy with a lot of guy friends and even some guy friends who I liked and who liked me. I cannot (well could not) relate to PJ. I could relate to Joey Potter though. Maybe she's an avatar for the creator (wouldn't be the first time), but the way Jordan S portrays her, there's a lot that's just hard to believe. We're supposed to believe that Keith from Scrubs ( her flirting with him was soooo unprofessional), the guy from Warehouse 13, Carter from Eureka, Jeremy Sisto, Bobby's brother, a couple of guys she wasn't interested in etc etc all were into her with her personality being as dull as it was. Literally the only guy this show claimed wasn't into her was a gay guy. It's not about her being a tomboy...it's about how dull she was. Playing poker and drinking beer is not a personality. She always looked awkward in a dress and heels, with curls in her hair, during her bedroom scenes, the stereotypical Chuck Taylors...I wasn't buying it. I mean, better "tomboyish" characters are the aforementioned Joey, Parker from Leverage, Icebox from Little Giants, and Queen Latifah's character on Living Single. They all had fleshed out personalities beyond "isn't she just so awesome and perfect?" Even as an unserious comedy, it was too much. PJ is also just there in a lot of scenes even though it's her show which makes sense when 3 of the 5 guys are stand up comics.
One of the most obvious Mary Sue scenes was when everyone was ragging on Trouty (who was a fun addition), including PJ, but by the end, he only reciprocated criticisms of the guys. Yet she joined in every time dogging him. Another time was when she did a horrible job for her first tv gig and tried to blame sexism (so typical and ironic since she's one of the guys until she doesn't want to be), but then instead of the show letting her take the L, Bobby gets on the same show and also embarrasses himself too. She also supposedly has all these other friends when the show makes it clear that the only people she wants to hang out with are these guys. It's also ironic how Stephanie had enough ambition to write a bestseller, but even she is supposed to be a loser at times (compared to PJ) and PJ does nothing but write a column (which Bobby also does so it's not unique to her) and her one book opportunity fell through. Overly propped lead characters are a pet peeve of mine. I think her inner monologues are designed to make her Carrie Bradshaw-esque, but even Carrie had some low points on the show.
By far, the best part of the show was Gaffigan and when he left, the show definitely lost something. IMO, he was the non stereotypical character which can probably be attributed to Andy being PJ's brother and not another type of guy attracted to her (eye roll). I'm sure JG ad libbed a lot too. I actually liked all of the guys for the most part. Bobby I remember from some Disney tv movies growing up; he was definitely the Marty Stu of the group. If the guys weren't fawning over PJ, they were fawning over Bobby. Mike is essentially the group's Joey Tribbiani, but couldn't figure out how to act around women? They always had Kenny and Stephanie snapping at each other but there was absolutely zero UST, so their hooking up at the ranch was too much. It just wasn't enough to make you think they deep down were attracted to each other. Like Xander/Cordelia, Ron/Freddie on A Different World, Bradley and Ted on Hey Dude (yikes I feel old), or even that one time Niles and Lilith hooked up. Or Niles and CeCe Babcock (perfect example of UST)! Stephanie's actress oversold how much she hated Kenny compared to how mellow Kenny was. We were also never given a source of their ill feeling towards each other, so it couldn't be determined if it was justified. It was rarely funny. Brendan is the most charismatic of them all (including Bobby), but they put him through so much, turning him into a loser and a d-bag. My guess is that knocking Brendo down a few pegs was done to keep Bobby propped.
Between Andy leaving and PJ/Bobby, I went from must watch in s1-2 to letting the eps linger on my dvr in s3. Eventually I gave up and actually found out after the fact that the show was canceled and that they dropped Andy completely and had him move to China.
Sometimes I get in the mood to watch the episodes I downloaded back then (I don't think you can find them in 2023) and the baseball analogies sound dated and too on the nose now. The way the show flows, baseball is purely PJ's job (I don't remember the group ever even attending a game), so it sounds superforced when she doesn't even talk about baseball in her basic dialogue. The only friendship of the group that feels wholly natural is Kenny and Mike. Without the poker and drinking, would Andy ever hang out with his sister and her friends like this? Doubt it.
This show was watchable at the time, but really lacks both the nostalgia and timelessness of shows like Friends or Seinfeld and to an extent Sex and the City (which is probably what this show is inspired by).
Lights, Camera, Romance (2021)
With a friend like Emma, who needs a saboteur?
Whenever I see a movie about matchmaking and a lead character named Emma, my mind immediately thinks it's some Jane Austen adaptation. (I actually just assumed and got confirmation when I came to the page to review it). It is an extremely loose adaptation, but all you need to know is this movie has the worst ending and you should just avoid it.
Not only does Emma force a friendship with Hope, she sets her up on an awkward date, tries to force a second date completely oblivious that the date is in love with her (Emma), the date then humiliates Hope...Gray and Hope become friends and even date, and once Emma's relationship with Barry doesn't pan out, and she sees Gray not actively pining for her, so now she wants him, barely hides it, and Hope gets shafted again! What a joke. Hope should stay away from this entire group!
I ended up FF just to see if I was right about Emma and Gray, because I could see it coming a mile away. When I saw Gray and Hope getting closer, I was gaining respect for the movie perhaps going the non-typical tropey route. But alas, that was premature. Nobody was encouraging Gray to pursue a relationship with someone who was actually interested and who paid attention to him. Emma was such a self-centered character and I don't think I've ever seen any version of "Emma" that was this bland and this unlikeable. Everything that happens affects her in some way because that's how she sees it. Even convos other characters have that didn't start out about her end up being about her. She literally does not care that she wrecked Hope's chances of love TWICE. Emma literally got everything she wanted in this movie even though she was like a wrecking ball for Hope, Gray (for a while), and even Zane! I mean, was Barry "using" her for acting tips supposed to be her comeuppance for everything else? Please!
The acting was so bland and uninspiring. Being a lower budget movie does not mean quality acting can't be found. Literally no inflection in voices, no sense of these characters being relatable. Nothing. I saw the Barry actor in a Lifetime "thriller," and he was so much better there. I think I recognize a few of the others also. Gray was like a Tubi version of Rob Mayes.
I'm not a movie snob, which is why I watch Tubi and gave this movie a chance. I am a squish at heart, so I am a sucker for a romcom. I love Pretty Woman but I also LOVE My Best Friend's Wedding (that movie had the exact right ending). I'm in my 30s and don't see that changing. But this plot did not follow at all and again, even if the budget is lower, that's no excuse. Even B movies from the 30s, 40s, and 50s, even the 90s had sensible scripts. Just not big budgets and stars. And Emma was just not the best lead. Such a wrecking ball.
Three stars bc I finished it, but I low key resent myself for watching it. Honestly, just watch Clueless for an amazing version of Emma with a relatable, unselfish, and well-acted character who deserved the happy ending. (Also Cher didn't wreck Ty's life over Josh).
The Wedding Veil Journey (2023)
Who appreciates their friends crashing their honeymoon?!
If there was ever a scenario where your friends should not just show up. Aren't Avery and Emma new mommies? I have nothing against the ladies' friendship and bond, but the constant picking up and going wherever one of their crises happens to be gives co-dependent much more than "I'll be there for you." (I typed that while singing the Friends theme). Does anyone ever talk to their friends on their honeymoon? I didn't? In the first three movies, it was tolerable, but these are married women now. Why would Paolo and Peter be ok with this constantly? How was this any different from Tracy being upset that Nick was cooking ("working") in Greece? Nick saying Emma and Avery were there before him is exactly how mothers-in-law end up in the middle of marriages. Also let it be known that Emma flew to Greece for Tracy but never once flew to Italy to support her husband in the last movie. Insanity!
Honestly, the first three movies were absolute gold for Hallmark. Definitely their best series of films since the Vineyard movies (I'm still kind of mad we didn't get a Baby in the Vineyard for Frankie and Nate) and the Wedding March films. By far their best movies of 2022. But the next three WV movies are poor in comparison. It's like they (maybe) didn't expect the success of the three and just threw these together. First w/Avery and Peter being a spoiled and dramatic couple, and Paolo and Emma having problems where they (really Emma bc Paolo was trying) seemed to forget how they met and came to be in the first place, and now Tracy and Nick, who are my favorite couple in this series, having personality transplants as well.
I found it hard to believe that Tracy and Nick did not make time for their honeymoon. Waiting three years does not seem like something they would allow to happen given the last movie and what they went through to be together. Granted, Nick had a new restaurant when they got together, but three years? Hold on, didn't they marry after dating a year, so maybe it's been four years? And after that lack of communication and connection that hasn't been dealt with....a preteen child? (more on that later).
Tracy and Nick are my favorite bc somehow, even in Hallmarkland, their relationship and conversations seem way more grounded and realistic for their age group. They have the most mature (not old, but grown up) chemistry. I loved their movie the most (Emma/Paolo being second bc duh...Italy). I've been watching these HM movies forever and I'm only in my 30s, but after seeing so many, I appreciate the more to-the-point conversations about what each character wants. I also loved that in the first movie, they were both very clear that they were dating (even if Tracy got cold feet). Too often in these movies, the characters are clearly dating and interested, but refuse to even be direct about it. I loved that these two were not that and that they kissed before the end. I found it weird that the other two movies didn't do that when arguably their relationships developed over a longer period than Tracy's. I love angst, but angst that makes sense. All three continually blindside their husbands with whatever big decision they make (after ONLY talking to their two friends) and the husbands just accept it and eventually agree. The only decision that made sense in this was Nick deciding that he wanted to take a step back with business side of his restaurants to be in the kitchen more. That seemed like a perfectly reasonable realization after some time away from it all and after realizing it was affecting his marriage. Tracy's "void" was completely out of nowhere and iirc Nick even acknowledged her sudden change.
I also LOVE my kiddos...however, I recognize that not every couple wants children and that's ok! T/N weren't the "ewww kids...gross," types of child-free characters, so it was fine! Tracy and Nick can't even make time for each other, but a preteen child that would have to get used to a new country and culture? After a week??? Because that's what Tracy wanted? As soon as I saw Leo, I knew. As soon as he said "he loves New York!" I knew even more. Listen, I prefer if movies don't make "statements" and get on soapboxes all the time, but there would have been absolutely nothing wrong with T/N agreeing that their lives were fulfilled without children. IIRC, I think EMMA also had the same hesitations and we saw how that turned out, so why repeat it with Tracy? I could even see them being more inclined to do youth-centered cooking and art programs. Or even sponsor Leo from the States. It's almost like Nick and Tracy needing to reconnect plus the next veil match wasn't enough (it was). Her deciding Leo needed a better life (essentially strong arming her way) was just like EMMA working it out for her Italian student in Unveiled. What is with them using Peter for everything? I usually find the movies with adoption storylines endearing (Christmas Town, Holly & Ivy, A Mrs. Miracle Christmas, also a movie I saw as a kid in the 90s The Boy Who Loved Christmas. North to Home was also good), but for Tracy to just decide that she knew what was best for Leo put me off. I think she and Nick had exactly two convos about it: when she decided she wanted it and when he agreed. They could have cut out some of subplots or unnecessary visits from Avery and Emma and used that time for N and T to develop more as a couple and work through whether or not a preteen child was really what they wanted. IDK, it really felt like Leo was for Tracy until the point in the movie where he had to start interacting with Nick....since Nick was going to become his dad.
Also the awkward next veil couple is here with Tessa and the Dalton guy, just like with Emma's assistant Lily and Carlo Marks. I truly did not expect these stories to mimic each other this much. Is it me, or does the legend of the veil become less so if the veil is being manipulated? Again, I find the vibe and relationship of Tracy and Nick to be much more unique than the other two couples, so this was annoying. Such a romantic setting and I really expected more of them together. It was a honeymoon after all! Even a montage would have worked. Also, I appreciate them technically incorporating Nick more into this sequel and giving him his own side story ONSCREEN, unlike with Peter and Paolo, but Xander not realizing the difference in "his" food was silly after two dinners. I found it ridiculous that a native Greek could not identify the missing ingredient in a GREEK family dish, but Nick could.
Loved Alison's wardrobe in this (she was glowing) and I love Victor Webber. He's been a fave since a baseball movie he did with Candace. I loved the Matchmaker series as well. They have great chemistry, Alison and Victor, and I believe them as a couple! The scenery and location is BEAUTIFUL (one scene had a gorgeous sunset I want to paint). I always love when HM does location movies (no offense Canada), but that only goes so far when the script is meh. I started FF every time the Leo plot came around. I missed the reason why T took the veil to Greece (edit: taking to Nick's sis in Spain), but I guess it has to costar in all the movies no matter what. It really bugged me that Emma and Avery showed up on their honeymoon as if it was the most normal thing ever, particularly since Tracy expressed they were having trouble connecting. More than any of the other pop up visits in all the movies, this one showed a supreme lack of boundaries.
I'm not the type to say they shouldn't milk it, but if they do more, I'm checked out. But hey, if they want to try it again with a necklace (see the ending), have at it. Although again, does it not take away from how special the veil is supposed to be? I would rate the follow ups in this order: Inspiration, Journey, and Expectations wayyyy behind in another time zone. I let these movies linger on my dvr way too long, and now I'm glad I've seen them all and can move on. I'll stick with the first three. I watch Lifetime, HM, and GAC, etc so I know what I'm getting with tv movies, but I had higher expectations (ugh sorry...unavoidable) for the second trilogy and they weren't worth the wait. 6/10.
Nightmare Pageant Moms (2023)
Moms, Daughters, and Tiaras...watchable but no fun
It was a totally missed opportunity for the movie not to have leaned into the camp way more like they do with the cheer and sorority movies. Come on, Lifetime and a pageant movie? I personally gave it a wide berth to make me laugh at how over the top it could be. I anticipated a lot of pomp, circumstance, some montages, and most importantly, ham and it just never really happened.
The actress who played Adeline was in Nightmare Neighborhood Moms, or something like that, and she's good at playing these Queen b/bully/shade queen characters. That said, I never got the impression that Adeline was worried about being caught OR really proving something to her mother. I mean she was so brazen even after being caught sabotaging Emilia. Sophia and Emilia were ok but their roles could've been played by anyone. I think the mother/daughter duos from Nightmare Neighborhood Moms and Nightmare PTA Moms (yes, I use these movies for work day background noise) had better personalities. I also found it was strange that only Adeline, who has never won, was the only one willing to do anything to win. I'm not into pageantry, but I don't think it's a stretch to say that the competitions, in real life and in entertainment, naturally bring out the worst in the contestants. I find it hard to believe that she was the only bad apple with bad behavior. Maybe the others wouldn't go as far as murder or sabotage, but I expected more competitiveness and drama in general and not just what Adeline fueled.
The climax was cringe with the video, and felt like the end of a very special 90s show where someone got exposed. The acting was questionable and idk the whole thing was underwhelming. For how the movie ended, even having a body count at all seemed unnecessary. Especially the judge. Adeline plants drugs on contestants, blackmails, but impulsively kills a judge in a public place? After her first impulsive murder? Seems excessive when she's been shown to be manipulative enough to frame people or have others do her bidding. There's a homecoming movie on LMN where the movie's psycho wants revenge on a boy (now man) who she had unrequited feeling for and his actual gf (now wife). The climax scene in that movie is so classic and fun. Pure camp. Lifetime should have really gone acceptably overboard for a pageant movie. Go full Dallas or Dynasty or even Miss Congeniality. This movie had none of the classically camp scenes 90s Lifetime would have added.
I think it's obvious who planted the seed for Adeline's bad behavior (though she is an adult who is responsible for her own actions). Rebecca was just as toxic and awful as her daughter. Was that intentional? She was so horrible to Adeline but was clearly the creator of the monster. The movie never explains why she was so hard on her daughter or why she had so much palpable disdain for her. After all, she would have been the one to spoil, enable, and indulge Adeline all her life. I don't think they even mentioned her father. Why would she encourage her daughter to be in pageants, which in turn put pressure on her granddaughter? Also, why would Adeline and Liliana be eligible for a competition 100% sponsored by a family member? Lol.
Not really a criticism but an acknowledgement of the times...a pageant without an audience? They did acknowledge the audience "watching at home," but it still seemed empty and too contained to just the contestants. IDK if their budget would have allowed it, but a green screen audience would have made it look so much more realistic. Lifetime has done this with concert movies.
Would I recommend it? Meh...don't go out of your way to watch it. If this is a "Nightmare" series like "The Wrong" movies, I'd say the PTA Moms and Neighborhood Moms movies are better.
Falling for a Killer (2023)
Really like Jonathan Stoddard and Lindsay Hartley....
But I had to quit this movie. Not only was it slow-paced, but Darcy had a terrible attitude. She's the typical nose in the air, hates her family but visits them and sulks. She treats people poorly, judges them, but all of her decisions are right and justified. Not a fan of characters written this way and Lifetime does this a lot. The sister was a dingbat, but it was well acted bc I've seen the actress in other movies on LMN and Hallmark and she has some range. The scenes with the dad were so hammish and awkward. I got the Ivy League and safety school jokes, but that whole thing was too cringe. The whole family was weird lol.
I ended up skipping a lot AND reading a play-by-play recap...I can't believe this movie did nothing more creative than internal rage and insurance money???? How in the world would he have gotten insurance money for Lindsay's character's death? At HIS office late at night, and down an elevator shaft? That would have been too suspicious, absence of cameras or not. And IMO, Lindsay's character as a director was an obvious cameo, so they should have had maybe her family or the family of another wife involved or tracking him trying to prove he did something to them. This story was too contained in this family to be believed. It would have given the feeling that his lies were always trailing him.
Something I just thought of...it would have been more interesting if this movie was more like Hitchcock's Suspicion where Tom, I mean Thomas, was the Cary Grant character where you weren't quite sure if he was capable of murder. The opening scene and offing the waiter would have obviously blown that, but they could have gone for ambiguity in the wife's death and had the audience questioning what he was capable of. Lying about his name? Sure. Making up life details? Sure. But murder? It would have been more suspenseful to not be sure than to have his actions be so obvious and we're all just waiting for the climax where the movie turns into your basic Lifetime thriller with a bloviating villain. I agree with another contributor...the potential was there, but it fell way short.
And that ending...They are really entertaining a sequel, huh? With Darcy being as dim as her sister? Taking off a star in anticipation for a crappy part 2.
The Brothers Warner (2007)
"Harry was doing it for moral reasons."
Come on. It's important to keep in mind that this doc was made by Harry Warner's granddaughter, so that bias seeps through from the first minute. She has managed to make her grandfather sound the best out of the four brothers. In the beginning when she's introducing the brothers, each one has a flaw but her grandpa. Even Sam who passed away at a young age (40) gets poor treatment in this. His wife is totally disrespected in this and I bet if she said what she really thought of what his family did to her, she wouldn't be in this documentary. In Jack's intro, she low key implies through her mother that Harry thought little brother Jack was a loser with no direction. Which is ironic since Jack is the Warner anybody knows.
As Harry's granddaughter, completely whitewashing how he and his wife came to "win custody" of Sam and Lita Warner's daughter tells you everything you need to know. He did it because Sam's wife was not Jewish, she was Catholic. The documentary never makes you aware of this. I can't believe this documentary goes so far to include Sam's daughter saying she had a better life than she would have and then another line with the mother saying she was young at the time. Everything you can read about the situation seems to indicate that she was harassed and bullied into giving up her child by the domineering Harry (who also hated Jack's second wife) so that left a bad taste in my mouth. Not that I expected a report on the family drama, but even a Google search of them will reveal what Cass W tries to sanitize about Saint Harry. There's a whole segment on his courage about calling out the N azis. He was Anti-Hitler but was bigoted towards Catholics in his own family. Mmkay. It would be like leaving Marilyn Monroe out of a profile of JFK that calls him a devoted family man. It just rings hollow and false. Also if you listen, her mother never mentions Sam's daughter even though they were raised as siblings. There's no family photo shown with her included so you kind of just get the sense that it was about control and not what was best for the child. This documentary reminds me of the the book and movie about The Temptations spearheaded by Otis Williams. Everything wrong was David, Eddie, and Paul. Otis never ever made a mistake. This has the same vibe.
Another critique I have is this documentary is not organized very well. It jumps back and forth between the family and the studio but not in a cohesive way all the time. I did skip through at least twice. What Cass Warner adds in the narration you have to take with a grain of salt bc...grandpa. You're actually learning more from the film historians and the interspersed actors and executives who definitely understand the business better than her. And who knew and worked with Jack. He was responsible for so many classics.
She never explores why Jack Warner went behind his brothers' backs with the deal to sell and then rebuy the company. Surely that didn't occur in a vacuum? Surely someone was alive around the time of this doc to share some insight? No internal papers? There's also so little on Albert. I believe his grandson was interviewed, but he didn't seem as if he knew much more than he maybe heard from his father.
It was gross and appalling to hear Cass say that had Jack come to Harry's funeral, he would not have been in the car crash that landed him in a coma. Disgusting. I had to rewind it to make sure I heard correctly. Who says that? Not to mention she never ever approaches her grandfather with any criticism much less saying garbage like this about anything he'd done. Maybe Jack stabbing him in the back was karma for what he did to Sam's wife? She honestly sounds like she's taking jabs at Jack for her grandfather. It's petty.
The only worthwhile parts of this are the video clips and audio of the brothers. I'm in my 30s and while I love classic movies, my introduction to the "WB" was Looney Tunes on Nickelodeon and Tiny Toons after school. It was cool finding out (years ago at this point) that they were real. I enjoyed seeing the footage of them all. And to see films that TCM doesn't air often or at all. Other the original footage, the only thing interesting to me about Cass is her son is married to an actress who was in one of my favorite tv shows growing up.
It's WB month for their 100th anniversary on TCM and I've been enjoying the films being shown. While current WB is a mess (and ironically not a family business anymore), I only checked out this documentary believing it would be something better.
Love You to Death (2015)
Skip it
This movie was awful. I couldn't stand the sister for forcing Yasmine and then her niece to see their abusive father/grandfather just bc SHE thought it was time for Yasmine to get over it. Jog on, sister. This movie was hard to sit through for that reason alone. And no, what the father did at the end does not absolve him. You can forgive and move on, but you don't have to forget. Nor do you have to allow your abuser back into your life. What is this movie on?
This is not a new movie, but it came on again yesterday and as I watched it, I remembered why I couldn't stand it.
Even the case she's working on isn't that interesting. Same for the girl she wants to help. What's that song? "don't save her, she don't want to be saved." Tired of reckless characters acting out, but being made into angels for no reason.
I like Bree W, but this movie is not it.
IMDb is saying I need to type more, but this movie was such a disappointment that all I can really recommend is that you skip it.
Psycho Paramedic (2023)
There is an old Are You Afraid of the Dark? episode...
Similar to this (with a ghost not a psycho) that is far more chilling and entertaining even now that I'm in my 30s instead of preteens.
First off, this actor and more importantly this character has to be at least 25. At worst he's early 30s. Who's idea was it to have him obsessed with a high schooler just because his prom was ruined? ICK. For those who've seen the Albert Beck movies, he was obsessed with young women but it was more of an obsession with saving them. The dude from the shark movies was at least obsessed with girls his own age.
So much cringe. Like the body count. At least on AYAOTD, the ghost didn't kill anyone. This guy goes and kills the drunk driver like it's no biggie. He kills his partner. I mean how is this a "secret" that is worth killing over?
How are characters always able to get into their old high schools and do the absolute most? This is also like the third Lifetime movie in the last few weeks that has had the protag (male and female) pretend to be the deceased to get the upper hand. Did the same writer write all three?
The ending was so stupid. Is he obsessed with teenage girls bc of his missed prom or is he obsessed with women in general? The ending made no sense. I did get a kick out of his laughter turning to tears.
A 4.9 is harsh but valid.
Hidden Family Secrets (2021)
It's not that bad
I thought the movie did a lot of things well: Psycho granny wasn't a ham or over the top caricature. Katherine and Chuck surviving as a couple after everything Granny threw at them. Hayley and Libby actually looked like sisters. I'm very glad the movie allowed Chuck to be mad at Kate for lying to him about their first child. Sometimes you just don't know with Lifetime and how they'll portray husbands. I'm glad to the movie didn't allow her to blame her mother 100 percent without being called on her part in it.
The story itself wasn't too complicated as long as you realize Hayley is sick. I think the first time I watched, I missed that part or how severe it was, but her illness is what drives the whole movie. I thought the movie was subtle in how it all came together with Libby's boyfriend and Libby piecing things together. I feel like Chuck and Kate should have asked more questions about the donor, but I can also see how they would trust Gran to handle it. But I'd like to meet the person who saved my child's life.
There was simply no reason for this movie to have a body count. That was very unnecessary. I understand societal shame or whatever, but really Granny? The two people she murdered weren't just randos, so how did she expect to get away with it? And then attacking her daughter? What in the world? In this regard, she was over the top. And she was such a good and brazen liar claiming the baby died anyway, I don't see how murder to keep the secret was needed.
The scene at the end with the reunited family was very sweet. I believed that they were a family. It was also nice to see an abandoned daughter not be the psycho in any capacity.
I absolutely HATE that Grandma got away. Assuming that the scene at the end wasn't just her working through someone. She killed two people and Katherine clearly connected the dots with Amber's death on the stairs. How did she get away at the end? That was the wrong ending for this movie. Thankfully it didn't ruin it, but I still didn't like it.
The Wedding Veil Inspiration (2023)
Better than Expectations, but not by much
I'm mad that I've had these three movies on my dvr since January bc both Expectations and Inspiration (Inspiration is better however) do not live up to the wonderfulness of the first three. If Tracy's movie "Journey," does knock it out of the park, then I won't go out of my way to watch any more in this series if they make them.
Emma and Paolo are my second fave couple in this series after Tracy and Nick. Their whirlwind romance in Italy was sweet, they have chemistry, and Italy is one of my favorite places ever so that movie could not lose as far as I was concerned. I love how Paolo teases her about pizza bc honestly, I felt the same way he does after my first visit there =)
I'm really not sure what to make of these couples as married people. As I mentioned in my Expectations review, Avery and Peter weren't that great of a couple and Emma and Paolo are only slightly better. Pardon the pun, but they all seem (so far, still have to watch Tracy and Nick) to expect and feel entitled to only idyllic ideas/outcomes about marriage as if it'll be a permanent honeymoon phase. Which after years of HM movies, doesn't work anymore imo. All three women are in their 40s, and have all played the starry-eyed naive romantic in their careers at one point or another, but by this series? It just doesn't work the same.
I did not understand Emma holding on to that job. It was stressing her out and affecting her marriage. The "twist" of her boss giving her a hard time just so she'd know she didn't want the job was silly even for Hallmark. It was lowkey creating a toxic and hostile workplace even if Emma "wanted" the job. If this was a drama, the boss would have been reported to HR and then what, she'd say "lol j/k?" What if Emma put up with it longer than she did? She couldn't have an honest conversation with Emma about her goals? Would not a true mentor do that? The career storyline was by far the weakest of the movie. She also seemed to clearly enjoy sharing art history at the store than her daily work at the university.
I really didn't like how Paolo essentially moved to Chicago FOR her, but she couldn't understand why he felt the need to be home. Just like Avery, Emma has problems of her own making. I do not agree with those who say she gave up her dreams for a man...she didn't want the job! She couldn't even handle budget cuts which would have been her job no matter how much she liked her colleagues. She wouldn't have been able to fire herself every time. And he's not just a man, he's her husband. Big difference. She also didn't update her life plan even though she had IDK a major life event take place. But even with that, it was pretty obvious that neither Paolo nor Emma really acknowledged that his family lived so far away and how they would handle him needing to go back there for any real period of time. It felt like to Emma, Italy is just family to visit. He was the only son, very involved in the business side of things(thus even being the one to open the Chicago store), I thought it was incredulous that she was frustrated that he was home spending time with a sick elderly father and helping out. And aside from when he first left, I don't recall her even contemplating going to support him. Also, where are her parents? Do her movies mean to make it seem like family isn't as important to her as it is to Paolo and that's why she can't understand? I think Occam's Razor (aka no need to spend the budget on casting her folks) is the simplest explanation, but I don't know.
The other thing for me (and I said this about Expectations), but the other two friends, depending on the movie, that just drop their own lives to travel for one day therapy sessions seemed more plausible when they were all single. Not when they're all in new marriages and one has a less than a year old child. It makes sense for planned events like the opening of the store or such events, but random visits? No. For all intents and purposes, they're all 40-ish and Emma lives across the country...it just gives dependency. If you and your friends can do that, then your problems likely aren't as big as you imagine.
Speaking of and I"m sure it was a budget thing, but I would have really preferred that Emma actually gone to Italy and Paolo actually had been the one packing to come back to the U. S. Flipping that would have said more to me given that he was trying to still work on their marriage while he was away.
By far, the best part of the movie for me was the love story of Lily and Matteo. I just love Carlo Marks, so seeing him was a welcomed surprise. They were sweet, even if Lily was too old to be so awkward. I did like how in the end, he was honest about his feelings and because of that she had to do the same and stop giving mixed signals. The older I get (30s), the more I prefer romances with less beating around the bush. I liked how the veil was involved but not overly so bc I think adding more "veil" relationships takes away from the creativity of how Avery, Emma, and Tracy had the veil work for them. In Expectations, I wasn't a fan of how Avery's MIL was absorbed into the legend of the veil mostly offscreen.
I don't know. I liked the movie ok, but I don't think I'll rewatch. I respect wanting to cash in on the success of the first trilogy...they were some of Hallmark's best ever, but these last two don't really seem like a progression to me. Tracy is my favorite and I find her and Nick's story to be sweet, realistic (even as a fantasy romance) and just an overall better story. I don't know, something about it seems more grounded. Fingers crossed I don't hate that one.
I do think Autumn and Paolo have wonderful chemistry, and I wish they had more scenes in each other's presence in the movie.