A Christmas Story Christmas Review

The original 1983 "A Christmas Story" is a "classic" because of ubiquitousness and not quality- not to knock the film, but as someone who's never seen it in full, I still know "what" happens, all the famous scenes, that I don't feel the need to actually, you know, watch it. It has played consecutively on cable since I was a kid during the holiday, whether that dates me or the film, I'm not sure.

Look at me, getting off topic, or am I? See, "A Christmas Story Christmas," the belated sequel, has what the original had and what Seinfeld perfected: it's about nothing. Oh sure it has a plot, but the driving force is the season; there's no dramatic heft to any of the scenes, or at least the ones I've seen. It's just "about" Christmas, and with phony crap like "Falling for Christmas," or the overstuffed "The Christmas Chronicles 2," the easy-to-digest familiarity that "A Christmas Story Christmas" continues is a real treat.

Peter Billingsley returns as Ralphie, now a husband and father, who returns to his childhood home after his father passes. A would-be writer, there's a running story about him trying to get his book published before the year is over, or else he goes "back to work." This puts financial pressure on Ralphie and his wife Sandy (Erinn Hayes) to deliver the perfect Christmas on a budget, a far cry from the elaborate mansions, ranches and resorts the folks of Hallmark and Lifetime (and Netflix) feel define the spirit of the season.

He also has to write his dad's obituary, adding a touch of drama but really serving for a plot twist even an elf could spot coming a mile away. It's the closest thing this film has to a narrative, with short vignettes about shopping, snow, bullies, and a heaping serving of nostalgia from returning actors like Scott Schwartz, R.D. Robb, and Zack Ward. 

And I'm sure fans found them cute, but as a non-fan, they're just a distraction, probably the weakest part of the experience. They show up, wink at the camera, reference the original, and collect a paycheck. I mean they look like they're having fun, sure, but it feels like watching a band reunion who you never really liked in the first place.

So I'm giving this three stars because what? Did I like it? It's charming, I'll give you that, with a cozy atmosphere and look; freeze-frames could pass as Christmas cards from decades ago. But that doesn't explain my rating, especially when you consider its HBO Max debut and how similar "8-Bit Christmas" from last year it is. No, what "A Christmas Story Christmas" lacks in purpose it makes up for with having its big heart in the right place. It's the kind of movie you could see yourself falling asleep to after a few too many eggnogs, a compliment as backhanded as it is earnest. 

Falling for Christmas Review

I have never been skiing, I know what a way to open a review. But I don't get it- you "woosh" down a hill, in the freezing elements and for what? Is it a race or just for fun? How is it any different from just running in a straight line any other day, it makes just as much sense to me. So when it comes to ski lodges, there's no appeal, aside from getting a cozy warm feeling stereotypical of a picture print by Currier and Ives, but now I'm breaking into song and if I keep going I'll never forgive myself.

If I'm getting off-topic it is because I don't what to be here, writing about Netflix's "Falling for Christmas" starring Lindsay Lohan. It's about a ski lodge, one on the brink of bankruptcy, and I mean, it's not like it's a children's hospital or anything. They don't look to have many employees, so if they go under, how many people really are impacted? I'm sorry if I sound like Scrooge, I didn't want to watch it in the first place, but hey, too late now, and I must pay the price lest I get put on Santa's naughty list.

There's a certain novelty to seeing Lohan back in a lead role, but man, what a pathetic comeback vehicle. A low-budget romantic Christmas comedy? Who does she think she is, Candace Cameron Bure? She's probably the "better" actress in any real respect, though what the hell has happened to film criticism if this is what discussions have fallen to?

The plot is exactly what the trailer promised, as if its law of the motion picture association of hasbeen holiday yarns: Sierra (Lindsay Lohan), a spoiled heiress of a fancy ski resort gets amnesia after, ahem, falling down a mountain as her influencer boyfriend Tad (George Young) proposes. And wouldn't you know it, down-on-his-luck Jake (Chord Overstreet), owner of a significantly less fancy ski saloon, happens upon her while he takes some guests on a sleighride. Oh, and his horses name is Balthazar, and is probably the second best actor here next to, oh whatever.

Jake has a backstory to boot, involving a wife who died, leaving him to raise their daughter and run the business all by himself, or well, her mother Alejandra, played by Alejandra Carlisle; it is never a good sign when a character and performer share the same name.

If all this sounds familiar, that's because it is, and it is a shame to see the once-promising Lohan reduced to such a petty production. She's as effervescent and appealing as ever, but that alone cannot save "Falling for Christmas." Really, the most impressive thing here is Balthazar. It doesn't have much to do, but it was well behaved and looked clean.

Weird: The Al Yankovic Story Review

Be it movies, TV or music, if you don't like something that's on, you can always change the channel. But movies are an investment unlike music, where as three minutes of your time is far easier to afford to something new. Perhaps that's why Weird Al works so well parodying music, and not movies.

Well I suppose he did have his own show decades ago, but that is not what he's famous for.

"Weird: The Al Yankovic Story," coming to us free by The Roku Channel, is not the legit biopic its title or marketing suggests, instead being a parody of the genre. It's a good idea, proven to work from the the popular "Funny or Die" skit it's based on, but just because it works in a short lasting a few minutes doesn't mean it'll sustain a feature-length production.

The story chronicles the almost entirely fictional story of the rise and fall of Mr. Yankovic, with torrid sex, drugs, alcohol, and murder all played for laughs. But I never laughed, hell I barely cracked a smile most of the time; in fact the best moments here were when Daniel Radcliffe, playing Weird Al, performs his most famous songs. But I'm not going to laugh at a song that I've heard dozens of times that's decades old. It's like a "greatest hits" record spliced into an unrelated movie.

Parody movies are a tricky business because they're comedies, and comedy is hard. For every terrific "The Naked Gun" and "Austin Powers" we have duds like "Spy Hard" and, yes, even Al's own "UHF" from the 80's. There's a special magic that only the best parody films possess, but I would have been happy with an "OK" one. We have here a parody that isn't funny, and in the world of cinema, few things are more uncomfortable to sit through than an unfunny comedy.

I can't fault the cast, with Radcliff giving a dedicated performance, but I can fault director Eric Appel and Al himself, the two of which wrote the script. Moments linger along with nothing happening, scenes that make sense in serious films where we're invested in the characters and whatever they're thinking. Here, we're left thinking "where's the punchline?"

But there's one reason why "Weird: The Al Yankovic Story" fails as hard as it does: the dialogue just isn't sharp. Clever wordplay and puns Al injects into his songs are nowhere to be found. I say "found" and not "heard," because the musician often puts so many sight gags in his music videos that they become almost as fun to watch as they are to listen to. This is better not watched or listened to.

We get ridiculous situations like Madonna (Evan Rachel Wood) getting kidnapped by Pablo Escobar (Arturo Castro) so that Al will come to his birthday party. Sure, sounds silly enough, as does the sudden gunplay where henchmen are disposed ala John Wick. But so what? A ludicrous circumstance isn't inherently humorous, you need to play it straight, you need to push it over the edge of just being a scene in a movie with actors playing characters. A glib comment, unexpected slapstick, anything!

I've been a fan of Weird Al since I first heard his music, so I take no pleasure in reporting I experienced no pleasure watching this. 108 minutes is far too long for what is essentially a single joke, so once you hear the joke, all that's left are variations on the same thing. "Weird: The Al Yankovic Story" is a hard film to review because it's a hard film to enjoy or even understand. The best way to describe it is "weird," which if that's what they were going for, good for them. Its heart is in the right place, but that doesn't mean it wasn't an enormous waste of talent and resources.