Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Hot Tub Time Machine 2 (2015) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
When “Hot Tub Time Machine” came out almost five years ago, it took a whacky concept of four friends whisked back in time during a getaway to the 80s giving them a chance to fix aspects of their lives they wished they had done differently.
The outrageous and bawdy humor as well as strong performances from John Cusack and Crispin Glover made the film a cult hit that earned over $64 million worldwide and did well on DVD sales as well.
Naturally a sequel was planned and when I first heard it was looking to be a direct to DVD sequel sans Cusack, I had an idea that the film may be little more than an effort to cash in on the success of the first film without offering much to the continued story of the characters.
I was encouraged by the early trailers for the sequel and as such went into the screener with better expectations than I had originally had when I first heard of the projects.
The film explains that “John Cusack’s character is off on adventure of self-discovery as the friends have all become wealthy and famous after the events of the first film. Lou (Rob Corddry) has milked Motley Crue and his knowledge of pending tech to establish himself as a major player, Nick (Craig Robinson) has cashed in on a recording career by covering famous songs from his day before they were ever released and Jacob (Clark Duke) is stuck playing Butler to his father Lou.
Lou has become an example of an ego run wild and during one of his lavish parties; he is shot and left near death. In a move of desperation, Nick and Jacob whisk Lou into the Hot Tub and attempt to go back in time to stop the shooting.
Things do not go as planned as the trio end up 15 years into the future and must find a way to put things right and get home.
One would think that this premise would be able to produce some funny moments, but sadly the film is painfully slow and plodding and most shocking of all, very, very unfunny. The film tries to get some crude laughs from a gameshow of the future and a homicidal Smart Car but the film just wanders from situation to situation looking for laughs and does not setup or execute them properly.
There is a montage scene at the end of the film which sadly is the best part and shows what could have been a much better sequel with the group going through time taking the place of famous individuals and interacting with them.
As it stands, “Hot Tub Time Machine 2”, is a trip you do not want to make.
http://sknr.net/2015/02/20/hot-tub-time-machine-2/
The outrageous and bawdy humor as well as strong performances from John Cusack and Crispin Glover made the film a cult hit that earned over $64 million worldwide and did well on DVD sales as well.
Naturally a sequel was planned and when I first heard it was looking to be a direct to DVD sequel sans Cusack, I had an idea that the film may be little more than an effort to cash in on the success of the first film without offering much to the continued story of the characters.
I was encouraged by the early trailers for the sequel and as such went into the screener with better expectations than I had originally had when I first heard of the projects.
The film explains that “John Cusack’s character is off on adventure of self-discovery as the friends have all become wealthy and famous after the events of the first film. Lou (Rob Corddry) has milked Motley Crue and his knowledge of pending tech to establish himself as a major player, Nick (Craig Robinson) has cashed in on a recording career by covering famous songs from his day before they were ever released and Jacob (Clark Duke) is stuck playing Butler to his father Lou.
Lou has become an example of an ego run wild and during one of his lavish parties; he is shot and left near death. In a move of desperation, Nick and Jacob whisk Lou into the Hot Tub and attempt to go back in time to stop the shooting.
Things do not go as planned as the trio end up 15 years into the future and must find a way to put things right and get home.
One would think that this premise would be able to produce some funny moments, but sadly the film is painfully slow and plodding and most shocking of all, very, very unfunny. The film tries to get some crude laughs from a gameshow of the future and a homicidal Smart Car but the film just wanders from situation to situation looking for laughs and does not setup or execute them properly.
There is a montage scene at the end of the film which sadly is the best part and shows what could have been a much better sequel with the group going through time taking the place of famous individuals and interacting with them.
As it stands, “Hot Tub Time Machine 2”, is a trip you do not want to make.
http://sknr.net/2015/02/20/hot-tub-time-machine-2/
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Hot Tub Time Machine (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
Adam (John Cusack) is a man going nowhere fast. Upon his return home one day, Adam finds his girlfriend gone, his nephew Jacob (Clark Duke) in his basement addicted to playing online games that simulate real life, and his friend Lou (Rob Corddry) in the hospital.
When Adam meets up with his friend Nick (Craig Robinson) at the hospital, Nick attempts to brighten up Lou by offering him a trip to their old ski resort to relive the fun of their youth. With Jacob tagging along, the three friends head back to the site of their past glory, and realize that things have not improved with time.
The scenic town is now run down and largely abandoned and their resort has long since seen better days. Undaunted, the group breaks out the alcohol and heads for the hot tub in an effort to make the most out of their time with one another and to escape their empty lives.
Upon awakening from their stupor the group discovers that they have been whisked back to 1986 and they appear to everyone there as the younger versions of themselves. Jacob flips though when he sees himself as a flickering image and becomes convinced that they must not do anything to alter the future and must relive the weekend of 1986 over exactly as they did the first time.
A quirky repair man (Chevy Chase), indicates that he can fix the tub, but that he will need some time. Adam is thrilled when he meets his old girlfriend and then laments the fact that he has to end their relationship in order to preserve the timeline. Adam has long regretted her leaving the love of his life and is tempted to do things differently this time.
Nick looks to relieve his failed musical debut as a singer, but knows that he must do what is needed to get home. Lou, on the other hand, is the loose cannon of the group and is thrilled to get another chance at glory and chase women since he has become a pathetic loser in the future.
What follows is a madcap and outrageous comedy that lovingly resurrects the classic 80’s movies of old and infuses the modern gross out humor to successfully blend the old with the new as the friends struggle to get through the weekend and return home without altering the future.
The cast is solid, and Crispin Glover is great as the bizarre bellhop destined to have his arm go missing, but the when and how drives Lou insane in anticipation. While Robinson and Cusack do solid work, Corddry steals the film as a scheming, madcap mix of depravity and patheticness that drives the film.
While the movie did drag in a few parts for me there were enough laughs in the film to keep me interested and enjoy the nostalgic look back at my beloved 80s.
When Adam meets up with his friend Nick (Craig Robinson) at the hospital, Nick attempts to brighten up Lou by offering him a trip to their old ski resort to relive the fun of their youth. With Jacob tagging along, the three friends head back to the site of their past glory, and realize that things have not improved with time.
The scenic town is now run down and largely abandoned and their resort has long since seen better days. Undaunted, the group breaks out the alcohol and heads for the hot tub in an effort to make the most out of their time with one another and to escape their empty lives.
Upon awakening from their stupor the group discovers that they have been whisked back to 1986 and they appear to everyone there as the younger versions of themselves. Jacob flips though when he sees himself as a flickering image and becomes convinced that they must not do anything to alter the future and must relive the weekend of 1986 over exactly as they did the first time.
A quirky repair man (Chevy Chase), indicates that he can fix the tub, but that he will need some time. Adam is thrilled when he meets his old girlfriend and then laments the fact that he has to end their relationship in order to preserve the timeline. Adam has long regretted her leaving the love of his life and is tempted to do things differently this time.
Nick looks to relieve his failed musical debut as a singer, but knows that he must do what is needed to get home. Lou, on the other hand, is the loose cannon of the group and is thrilled to get another chance at glory and chase women since he has become a pathetic loser in the future.
What follows is a madcap and outrageous comedy that lovingly resurrects the classic 80’s movies of old and infuses the modern gross out humor to successfully blend the old with the new as the friends struggle to get through the weekend and return home without altering the future.
The cast is solid, and Crispin Glover is great as the bizarre bellhop destined to have his arm go missing, but the when and how drives Lou insane in anticipation. While Robinson and Cusack do solid work, Corddry steals the film as a scheming, madcap mix of depravity and patheticness that drives the film.
While the movie did drag in a few parts for me there were enough laughs in the film to keep me interested and enjoy the nostalgic look back at my beloved 80s.
Sarah (7799 KP) rated Lost At Christmas (2020) in Movies
Nov 24, 2020
Lacking in Christmas spirit
Lost at Christmas is a Scottish romantic comedy following two strangers that team up to try and get home for Christmas after finding themselves stranded in the Scottish highlands on Christmas Eve.
As a disclaimer, I am a major cynic when it comes to Christmas films and rarely ever find myself getting into the Christmas spirit, unless it’s in the company of a bonafide Christmas classic (think Home Alone or Muppets Christmas Carol). And I’m afraid to say that Lost at Christmas is definitely not a Christmas classic.
Rob (Kenny Boyle) and Jen (Natalie Clark) have a horrific time on Christmas Eve as their respective relationships come to a rather unexpected end, and find themselves stranded at a train station in the Scottish highlands. One of the few things this film does well is the setting. It is without a doubt a beautiful looking film set in some amazing Scottish scenery and director Ryan Hendrick knows how to showcase the sheer beauty that’s on offer and does this very well. It’s just a shame the rest of the film doesn’t match up this. There are some (thankfully infrequent) attempts at CGI that are very poor, and there are some unusually shot scenes, the most notably being the bathroom scene and from outside of a car windscreen, that don’t really work. In addition to the landscapes, Hendrick seems to love arty closeups on the actors faces and I’m afraid these don’t work either.
The plot is your stereotypical Christmas romantic film – it is the only time of year where strangers would happily travel together through the middle of nowhere. Any other time of year and this would be a horror film. This isn’t the only unfathomable action either, there’s a lot of things that happen that seem completely bizarre and out of place. This may be because this is obviously a home grown low budget offering that doesn’t have the Hollywood finances to make the bizarre seem a lot more believable. In Scotland, two strangers hating each other one minute and liking each other the next seems very out of place. Although the bickering between them in the first half an hour gets very tiresome very quickly, so it may have been for the best that they started liking each other quickly! There are at least a few laughs, although nowhere near what you’d expect from a film categorised as a romantic comedy.
One of the biggest issues with Lost at Christmas is the acting. I hate to be so cruel when it’s obviously a Scottish made film with local talent, but the acting on offer here is quite poor. There are some fairly heartwarming moments that are spoilt by a cliched script and some horrific acting. It seems to vary between overly exaggerated to having no feeling or emotion whatsoever, and it leaves you feeling unconvinced about any of the relationships that evolve. Sylvester McCoy is the only one who does well, as even Clare Grogan is hindered by some ridiculously overlarge glasses that are far too prominent in nearly every scene that she’s in.
Sadly though, Lost at Christmas’s biggest flaw is that for a Christmas film, it doesn’t feel very Christmassy. Despite being set at Christmas, with snow and mentions of Christmas at every opportunity, it is severely lacking in any Christmas spirit or emotions. Christmas films are meant to be overall a rather happy and festive experience, but Lost at Christmas feels rather dull and quite low spirited. And the music, whilst good, only serves to exacerbate the lack of Christmas spirit.
Anyone who likes Christmas films no matter what will likely find Lost at Christmas fairly enjoyable. However to me it was just a bit lost.
As a disclaimer, I am a major cynic when it comes to Christmas films and rarely ever find myself getting into the Christmas spirit, unless it’s in the company of a bonafide Christmas classic (think Home Alone or Muppets Christmas Carol). And I’m afraid to say that Lost at Christmas is definitely not a Christmas classic.
Rob (Kenny Boyle) and Jen (Natalie Clark) have a horrific time on Christmas Eve as their respective relationships come to a rather unexpected end, and find themselves stranded at a train station in the Scottish highlands. One of the few things this film does well is the setting. It is without a doubt a beautiful looking film set in some amazing Scottish scenery and director Ryan Hendrick knows how to showcase the sheer beauty that’s on offer and does this very well. It’s just a shame the rest of the film doesn’t match up this. There are some (thankfully infrequent) attempts at CGI that are very poor, and there are some unusually shot scenes, the most notably being the bathroom scene and from outside of a car windscreen, that don’t really work. In addition to the landscapes, Hendrick seems to love arty closeups on the actors faces and I’m afraid these don’t work either.
The plot is your stereotypical Christmas romantic film – it is the only time of year where strangers would happily travel together through the middle of nowhere. Any other time of year and this would be a horror film. This isn’t the only unfathomable action either, there’s a lot of things that happen that seem completely bizarre and out of place. This may be because this is obviously a home grown low budget offering that doesn’t have the Hollywood finances to make the bizarre seem a lot more believable. In Scotland, two strangers hating each other one minute and liking each other the next seems very out of place. Although the bickering between them in the first half an hour gets very tiresome very quickly, so it may have been for the best that they started liking each other quickly! There are at least a few laughs, although nowhere near what you’d expect from a film categorised as a romantic comedy.
One of the biggest issues with Lost at Christmas is the acting. I hate to be so cruel when it’s obviously a Scottish made film with local talent, but the acting on offer here is quite poor. There are some fairly heartwarming moments that are spoilt by a cliched script and some horrific acting. It seems to vary between overly exaggerated to having no feeling or emotion whatsoever, and it leaves you feeling unconvinced about any of the relationships that evolve. Sylvester McCoy is the only one who does well, as even Clare Grogan is hindered by some ridiculously overlarge glasses that are far too prominent in nearly every scene that she’s in.
Sadly though, Lost at Christmas’s biggest flaw is that for a Christmas film, it doesn’t feel very Christmassy. Despite being set at Christmas, with snow and mentions of Christmas at every opportunity, it is severely lacking in any Christmas spirit or emotions. Christmas films are meant to be overall a rather happy and festive experience, but Lost at Christmas feels rather dull and quite low spirited. And the music, whilst good, only serves to exacerbate the lack of Christmas spirit.
Anyone who likes Christmas films no matter what will likely find Lost at Christmas fairly enjoyable. However to me it was just a bit lost.
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated Superman: Action Comics - The Oz Effect in Books
Nov 30, 2020
I passed on "The Oz Effect" when it first ran in ACTION COMICS back in 2017. The whole "Rebirth" thing intrigued me, but some of the stuff like the Flash/Batman crossover "The Button", just left me cold and bordering on disinterest. When I saw the identity reveal as to the story arc's antagonist, I felt frustrated and disappointing, feeling like "#Facepalm Didn't we do something like this already?!".
Since re-discovering my love of Superman (my earliest recollections of the character were one of love and admiration, because he was just so darned GOOD, y'know?) during Bendis taking the reins, I figured reading this book would aid me in what was to come. Catching it on a recent Comixology sale for the Big 'S' was the icing on the cake!
The first story in book, the two-issue story "Only Human", written by Rob Williams, was just meh. It felt like "paint by number", as far as the plot was concerned. Nothing in it made me go, "Whoa! Holy crapola, that was fab!" Nope.
The only reason it was included was due to the inclusion, and overall influence, of Mr. Oz on the story. Outside of that, I saw no reason to include it, other than DC wanted to add more pages (good, bad, or otherwise) for the money spent on purchasing it!
Now, the art by Guillem March was another story altogether. I felt he did a great job of capturing the heroic aspects to Superman, as well as the "human" side, achieving a perfect balance. I also thought the way he drew Lois Lane was also perfect, making her appear to be smart, because, well, she is, right? 'Nuff said. Thank you. Guillem, for helping to make this a 3-Star review instead of just a 2-Star one!
As far as the remainder of the book, which WAS "The Oz Effect, I thought it was fair. Not terrible by any means, but certainly not the kind of Dan Jurgens' helmed story. I felt the dialogue involving Clark and Jon, as well as with Lois, was good, as was the way he handled Perry White. But the reveal for Mr. Oz (no Spoilers, promise!) was just a bit underwhelming!
The character who he really has been done before. Sometimes good, sometimes not so good. This round, I was just like "Hmmm.. Ok, didn't see it coming, but at the same time.." I think a lot of people, myself included, were hoping it would be WATCHMEN's Ozmandyias. *womp* *womp* Nope. And that, dear readers, is the only kinda-sorta Spoiler in this review!
What really made it work for me, as well as aiding that push for the 3-Star review, was the backstory. Even though <i>his name</i> (not gonna say it, but we all know the blue fellow in question) is not mentioned, it is clear who is behind all of this. The fact that he brought this person into the present, tweaking the grand scheme of Everything? Whew! That's heavy! And definitely interest enough for me to stay onboard with Supes, especially with care Bendis is exhibiting with the character as well as the book's main cast.
This was my first time with Viktor Bogdanovic's art style. Quite good, I'd say. He really does a great job at capturing character's emotions, really drawing you into what is going on in that particular panel. Definitely someone I will be looking out for going forward.
So, final verdict, do I recommend this? Yeah, because there's a lot of little bits that owe to the bigger story involving <i>him</i>. However, don't expect to have your mind blown or anything, because it really ain't gonna do that. But, it's good enough to read.
And that, dear readers, is all I have to say about it!
I will be curious to finally read Geoff Johns' DOOMSDAY CLOCK (hopefully, it will conclude in my lifetime!) as I feel a lot more will make sense.
Since re-discovering my love of Superman (my earliest recollections of the character were one of love and admiration, because he was just so darned GOOD, y'know?) during Bendis taking the reins, I figured reading this book would aid me in what was to come. Catching it on a recent Comixology sale for the Big 'S' was the icing on the cake!
The first story in book, the two-issue story "Only Human", written by Rob Williams, was just meh. It felt like "paint by number", as far as the plot was concerned. Nothing in it made me go, "Whoa! Holy crapola, that was fab!" Nope.
The only reason it was included was due to the inclusion, and overall influence, of Mr. Oz on the story. Outside of that, I saw no reason to include it, other than DC wanted to add more pages (good, bad, or otherwise) for the money spent on purchasing it!
Now, the art by Guillem March was another story altogether. I felt he did a great job of capturing the heroic aspects to Superman, as well as the "human" side, achieving a perfect balance. I also thought the way he drew Lois Lane was also perfect, making her appear to be smart, because, well, she is, right? 'Nuff said. Thank you. Guillem, for helping to make this a 3-Star review instead of just a 2-Star one!
As far as the remainder of the book, which WAS "The Oz Effect, I thought it was fair. Not terrible by any means, but certainly not the kind of Dan Jurgens' helmed story. I felt the dialogue involving Clark and Jon, as well as with Lois, was good, as was the way he handled Perry White. But the reveal for Mr. Oz (no Spoilers, promise!) was just a bit underwhelming!
The character who he really has been done before. Sometimes good, sometimes not so good. This round, I was just like "Hmmm.. Ok, didn't see it coming, but at the same time.." I think a lot of people, myself included, were hoping it would be WATCHMEN's Ozmandyias. *womp* *womp* Nope. And that, dear readers, is the only kinda-sorta Spoiler in this review!
What really made it work for me, as well as aiding that push for the 3-Star review, was the backstory. Even though <i>his name</i> (not gonna say it, but we all know the blue fellow in question) is not mentioned, it is clear who is behind all of this. The fact that he brought this person into the present, tweaking the grand scheme of Everything? Whew! That's heavy! And definitely interest enough for me to stay onboard with Supes, especially with care Bendis is exhibiting with the character as well as the book's main cast.
This was my first time with Viktor Bogdanovic's art style. Quite good, I'd say. He really does a great job at capturing character's emotions, really drawing you into what is going on in that particular panel. Definitely someone I will be looking out for going forward.
So, final verdict, do I recommend this? Yeah, because there's a lot of little bits that owe to the bigger story involving <i>him</i>. However, don't expect to have your mind blown or anything, because it really ain't gonna do that. But, it's good enough to read.
And that, dear readers, is all I have to say about it!
I will be curious to finally read Geoff Johns' DOOMSDAY CLOCK (hopefully, it will conclude in my lifetime!) as I feel a lot more will make sense.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Lost At Christmas (2020) in Movies
Nov 23, 2020
'Tis the season for Christmas cliche and Lost At Christmas certainly fits the bill... but stay tuned for a "pleasant" surprise?
When life changes very suddenly for two strangers they need to make their way back to their normal lives, but it's Christmas, and the simple journey home becomes something of an epic adventure across the Scottish Highlands.
I have realised that many years ago I found myself in a very similar situation to the one in this film, though thankfully I wasn't the one travelling anywhere. I have never really considered how difficult it might be to do this sort of journey... I'm fairly certain that I wouldn't do what this duo do... but you never know! So quite how believable this scenario is I can't say, but it does allow for the expected drama.
There's a great Doctor Who contingent in the cast and I loved Sylvester McCoy and Frazer Hines as Ernie and Frank. They're a fantastic little double act and McCoy definitely helped areas of the film that struggled. Jen, played by Natalie Clark, was quite a likeable character and I enjoyed the performance, but it was difficult to get anything more out of it once she was paired with our leading man. Rob, played by Kenny Boyle, was the chalk to Jen's cheese, he's gruff and mean but doesn't really have the redeemable qualities these characters have in reserve that make you root for them at the end of the film, coupled with the bland performance I found myself hoping that another stray singleton was going to appear and sweep Jen off her feet.
In my notes I tried to do some maths... maths in a film review?! I know! It baffled me too. There felt like discrepancies in Rob's timeline with his girlfriend when you compare their initial interaction and his reveal to Jen later on. It may just be me overthinking it, but when it came up my reaction was confusion, these things are easily foiled by vagueness but... *shrug*.
There's some beautiful scenery involved throughout the film but when you mix it with the obligatory Christmas film shenanigans you're not getting to enjoy a lot of it. Even its use in the opening titles wasn't great. The main backdrop of the pub is fun, though there are some issues with the use of space. Some shots make it seem expansive and some claustrophobic, and there's one shot in particular that made me audibly groan. Nearly everyone is in it, adults talking, teens (about four foot away from the rest of the cast) kissing... no... no kissing teens are putting themselves in that position, especially not these two. There would have been plenty of opportunity to have them in the back of this shot had the camera had a different angle.
The thing I think we should acknowledge about this film though is that it has some balls. Whenever I discuss romcoms and Christmas movies there are always a handful of scenarios that make me say "wouldn't it be great if these films did [insert realistic scenario here]?" Lost At Christmas went for it! Yeah... so it turns out... I want the cliche! Real-life sucks and actually, I'd rather bitch about things being unrealistic than see something that is much more likely to happen. Well done for doing it, but to quote my notes... "F*** THIS FILM!"
Lost At Christmas has so much potential in it. Let's take a look at my scale... You have bad Christmas films, very few fall into this category because they usually drop down so far that they get pushed back up the scale to "so bad they're good". Right next to "so bad they're good" is a general level for Hallmark-esque schmaltz (NOTE: this isn't to say that Hallmark movies won't break out into other areas, this is just a general descriptor for films that are pretty consistent in their watchability and themes... AKA: quality Sunday holiday fodder.) Then of course we have the Christmas classic level, that holds things like Home Alone, Klaus, Love Actually and Die Hard. Lost At Christmas is somewhere in the snowdrift between bad and schmaltz. With a bit more glitz and a few changes I could easily see this film being a hop, skip and a jump over the other side of Hallmark schmaltz as something you don't just watch because it started on the TV and you can't change the channel because you're holding down wrapping paper with one hand and have a spiral of sellotape in the other.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/lost-at-christmas-movie-review.html
When life changes very suddenly for two strangers they need to make their way back to their normal lives, but it's Christmas, and the simple journey home becomes something of an epic adventure across the Scottish Highlands.
I have realised that many years ago I found myself in a very similar situation to the one in this film, though thankfully I wasn't the one travelling anywhere. I have never really considered how difficult it might be to do this sort of journey... I'm fairly certain that I wouldn't do what this duo do... but you never know! So quite how believable this scenario is I can't say, but it does allow for the expected drama.
There's a great Doctor Who contingent in the cast and I loved Sylvester McCoy and Frazer Hines as Ernie and Frank. They're a fantastic little double act and McCoy definitely helped areas of the film that struggled. Jen, played by Natalie Clark, was quite a likeable character and I enjoyed the performance, but it was difficult to get anything more out of it once she was paired with our leading man. Rob, played by Kenny Boyle, was the chalk to Jen's cheese, he's gruff and mean but doesn't really have the redeemable qualities these characters have in reserve that make you root for them at the end of the film, coupled with the bland performance I found myself hoping that another stray singleton was going to appear and sweep Jen off her feet.
In my notes I tried to do some maths... maths in a film review?! I know! It baffled me too. There felt like discrepancies in Rob's timeline with his girlfriend when you compare their initial interaction and his reveal to Jen later on. It may just be me overthinking it, but when it came up my reaction was confusion, these things are easily foiled by vagueness but... *shrug*.
There's some beautiful scenery involved throughout the film but when you mix it with the obligatory Christmas film shenanigans you're not getting to enjoy a lot of it. Even its use in the opening titles wasn't great. The main backdrop of the pub is fun, though there are some issues with the use of space. Some shots make it seem expansive and some claustrophobic, and there's one shot in particular that made me audibly groan. Nearly everyone is in it, adults talking, teens (about four foot away from the rest of the cast) kissing... no... no kissing teens are putting themselves in that position, especially not these two. There would have been plenty of opportunity to have them in the back of this shot had the camera had a different angle.
The thing I think we should acknowledge about this film though is that it has some balls. Whenever I discuss romcoms and Christmas movies there are always a handful of scenarios that make me say "wouldn't it be great if these films did [insert realistic scenario here]?" Lost At Christmas went for it! Yeah... so it turns out... I want the cliche! Real-life sucks and actually, I'd rather bitch about things being unrealistic than see something that is much more likely to happen. Well done for doing it, but to quote my notes... "F*** THIS FILM!"
Lost At Christmas has so much potential in it. Let's take a look at my scale... You have bad Christmas films, very few fall into this category because they usually drop down so far that they get pushed back up the scale to "so bad they're good". Right next to "so bad they're good" is a general level for Hallmark-esque schmaltz (NOTE: this isn't to say that Hallmark movies won't break out into other areas, this is just a general descriptor for films that are pretty consistent in their watchability and themes... AKA: quality Sunday holiday fodder.) Then of course we have the Christmas classic level, that holds things like Home Alone, Klaus, Love Actually and Die Hard. Lost At Christmas is somewhere in the snowdrift between bad and schmaltz. With a bit more glitz and a few changes I could easily see this film being a hop, skip and a jump over the other side of Hallmark schmaltz as something you don't just watch because it started on the TV and you can't change the channel because you're holding down wrapping paper with one hand and have a spiral of sellotape in the other.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2020/11/lost-at-christmas-movie-review.html