Category: Todd’s Movie Reviews

Avengers: Age of Ultron Movie Review

Avengers: Age of Ultron moves the Marvel Cinematic Universe onwards while answering the questions we’ve been pondering for years. How is the romantic relationship going between Hulk and Black Widow? What’s going on with Hawkeye’s wife and children out on their family farm?

Wait, what?

These two out of nowhere subplots are emblematic of a pervasive problem with the sequel to the 2012 mega blockbuster. When Joss Whedon made the original three years ago, it was hard to imagine him combining Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Hulk, Black Widow and Hawkeye into a cohesive and satisfactory experience. Did he ever though and it resulted in one of the greatest superhero tales to reach the screen. With Ultron, many of the fears that were assuaged the first time are present. Here, the struggle is real and Whedon can’t manage to recapture the magic the second time around.

The pic dives headfirst into Avengers action in Eastern Europe with our protagonists obtaining Loki’s old scepter and Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) discovering its artificial intelligence capabilities. This results in the creation of Ultron (voiced by James Spader), a robotic monster hell bent on ending the world… you know, like all MCU villains. We’re also introduced to Quicksilver (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen), characters played by different actors in last year’s in X-Men: Days of Future Past. Incidentally, Quicksilver was used much more effectively in the latter.

Of course, we have most of the Marvel crew back. Scarlett Johannson’s Black Widow, who’s turned into one of the more interesting characters even though her aforementioned romance with Dr. Bruce Banner aka Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) seems to be a forced concoction to earn them more screen time. Same goes for Jeremy Renner’s Hawkeye, who isn’t one of the more interesting players and his previously unseen family history doesn’t help. And there’s Chris Hemsworth’s Thor and Chris Evans’s Captain America, both coming off sequels that improved upon their predecessors. Not the case here. Samuel L. Jackson’s Nick Fury, Don Cheadle’s War Machine and Anthony Mackie’s Falcon appear in more limited fashion. The girlfriends of Iron Man and Thor (Oscar winners Gwyneth Paltrow and Natalie Portman, respectively) are missing.

Where Ultron serviceably succeeds is its action sequences, including a humdinger battle between Hulk and Iron Man. The Marvel team obviously know how to make these glorious battle sequences and they acquit themselves fine here, though nothing matches the brilliance of the 2012 edition’s breathtaking climactic sequence. The issues I had are several and not just the needless subplots. Ultron is not an especially compelling villain. Many of the humorous quips fall flatter than normal. Even Downey Jr. (truly an example of the perfect actor in the perfect role) isn’t as fun this time around.

In a way, I found Age of Ultron comparable to the third Hunger Games entry, Mockingjay – Part 1. It’s necessary to view it so we can move on to the rest. With the MCU, that includes two more Avengers pics and forthcoming Thor and Captain America threequels. Ultron is “must see” viewing for that reason and that reason alone. Yet I hope what comes next elevates beyond the material we are given this time.

**1/2 (out of four)

The Maze Runner Movie Review

The Maze Runner is another film that can thank its existence to the YA… Hey, that’s the little kid from Love Actually!!! The one that played Liam Neeson’s son!! The kid that played the drums while his elementary school crush sang Mariah Carey’s “All I Want For Christmas” and broke numerous airport protocols with the help of Mr. Bean so he could get a kiss on the cheek from her!! Yes, that was my honest first reaction during about the first 15 minutes of this movie as I saw actor Thomas Brodie-Sangster all grown up. Let it be known: I adore Love Actually and I’m not afraid to say it.

Where were we? Ahh yes. The Maze Runner indeed is another film, like Divergent, that can thank its existence to the recent YA boom made largely popular by the Hunger Games and their movie adaptations. This, too, is based on a popular series of novels by James Dashner and deals with teenagers put in perilous situations where they must learn to work together. We open with 16 year old Thomas (Dylan O’Brien, who was 22 when this was made) waking up in a strange land where he has no recollection of who he is or how he arrived there (and not like a blacked out college kid that drank too much the night before way). The large field he finds himself in has been dubbed The Glade by its inhabitants, who are all also young boys in the same predicament. Including Love Actually dude!! Thomas soon learns that he’s the latest arrival in a series of men that arrive like clockwork every month. They’re surrounded by an enormous maze and the field dwellers have spent considerable time attempting to figure out how to get out of it with no luck.

There are rules in the community. Only men tasked as “runners” are permitted to enter the maze for investigatory purposes. If you don’t make it out by a certain time of day, you’re a dead man and scrawled names on the maze wall serve as their memorial. Thomas is understandably confused but also intrigued and his tenacity to solve the maze riddle is not totally met with approval, especially from Gally played by Will Poulter (the dude who sang TLC’s “Waterfalls” in We’re the Millers). There’s also Alby (Ami Ameen), who’s the resident OG (Original Glader). And Chuck (Blake Cooper), Thomas’s portly sidekick who is basically the community’s Chunk from The Goonies. And then a girl shows up (Kaya Scodelario), who actually knows her name and also seems to know Thomas. She’s not given a whole lot to do and I’m assuming her role becomes more pronounced in the sequels. There’s also that kid from Love Actually!!

Once Thomas and his cohorts enter the maze after he jumps the line to become a Runner, we soon discover it might be the gigantic robot spider creatures (or Grievers) causing a good deal of the problems. These creatures (who frankly look quite CG) contribute to the action sequences, which are handled fairly well but are nothing special or new whatsoever.

Eventually Patricia Clarkson shows up to explain the plot and also because it’s a rule that at least one Oscar nominated actor appear in these pictures, a la Woody Harrelson and Kate Winslet. As far as acting is concerned, O’Brien gives a serviceable performance as our lead, but 16? I don’t think so. Poulter stands out a bit, proving he can play a jerk after only knowing him as a virginal sweetie from We’re the Millers. And Love Actually kid is just fine.

Ranking The Maze Runner among the first editions of these YA novel based adaptations is rather simple. It isn’t as good as The Hunger Games but it’s better than Divergent. The plot is somewhat ridiculous once we are apprised of it, but director Wes Ball moves things along and it’s mostly entertaining while it lasts (though it kind of loses steam as it goes along). It sets itself perfectly up for a sequel (which is currently #1 at the box office) and there’s just enough in this original that I’ll likely watch its follow up like I did this one. On the couch and less surprised at seeing that Love Actually drummer boy kid.

**1/2 (out of four)

Spy Movie Review

After her terrific breakout role in 2011’s Bridesmaids, the filmography of Melissa McCarthy has nagged at me in one significant way. While her character in Bridesmaids was hilariously rough around the edges, what stood out was her innate likability. It’s a trait that was lacking in varying degrees in all her follow up work – Identity Thief, The Heat, and Tammy.

This situation is rectified in Spy, which teams McCarthy up for the third time with director Paul Feig after Bridesmaids and The Heat (they’ll collabo again next summer in the Ghostbusters reboot). Spy finds McCarthy playing more to her strengths and it’s a welcome sight. Yet it doesn’t totally mask that this effort is a fairly generic 007 genre spoof where the laughs are hit or miss.

McCarthy is Susan Cooper, a CIA analyst whose job consists mostly of assisting debonair agent Bradley Fine (a game Jude Law) by talking in his earpiece and helping him out of international intrigue jams. She’s head over heels for her assigned agent as well, which leads to a humorous fancy dinner scene with him where she’s a bit out of her element. Circumstances soon lead to Susan becoming a field agent responsible for tracking Rayna (Rose Byrne), who’s in possession of a nuke. Our newly minted spy must also work with rough and tumble agent Ford (Jason Statham, showcasing real comedic chops) who is far worse at his profession than he believes. His anecdotes about previous missions provide some of the larger laughs, such as when he had to reattach his arm with his other arm.

Spy follows the playbook of Bond spoof to a tee – various exotic locations, big and complicated action sequences, etc… McCarthy’s character, who gets to don various disguises, gives the actress the most she’s had to work with in a bit. The pic fits the bill as a lazy afternoon couch viewing experience and not much more.

One problem is that Feig has learned one unenviable trait from former colleague Judd Apatow. His movies are about 20 minutes too long and Spy’s premise doesn’t deserve the padded two hour running time. There is filler mixed with genuinely solid set pieces. Flaws aside, it’s nice to see McCarthy shine in a manner she’s not been afforded since her Oscar nomination for her standout part four years ago. I hope her material continues to improve.

**1/2 (out of four)

Furious 7 Movie Review

The adrenaline fused junk food soap opera that is the Fast and Furious franchise has met with real life in its seventh installment, Furious 7. The pic faced the unenviable task of addressing the death of one its signature stars Paul Walker, who lost his life in a car accident in 2013. The filmmakers handle it in a delicate and touching way at the conclusion and manage to give fans of the franchise what they’ve come to anticipate from this multicultural action fest. It’s got everything you’d expect: ridiculous and often cringe inducing one liners, incredibly choreographed sequences with cars doing things they have no business doing, beautiful scenery on both the human and geographical scale, and lots of dialogue about family (which hits closer than normal considering the events with Walker).

The plot of these proceedings is always secondary, of course. Furious 7 actually picks up after the events of Tokyo Drift, the series third entry and its weakest. This would be after the death of team member Han and our new villain is Deckard Shaw (Jason Statham), the older brother of part 6’s dearly departed villain Owen. Deckard is out for revenge and that means he’s targeting the whole crew, led by Dom (Vin Diesel), Brian (Walker), and Letty (Michelle Rodriguez), who’s still suffering from her amnesia as a result of her near death in part 4. The other usual suspects return including Tyrese Gibson, Ludacris, and Jordana Brewster. And there’s Dwayne Johnson back as Hobbs, the gloriously over the top federal agent who is responsible for some of the silliest bits of dialogue. One notable newcomer is Kurt Russell as a shadowy government agent and the veteran performer seems to be having a lot of fun.

Where the Furious movies succeed or fail depends mostly on the action set pieces and 7 has some dandies. The whole midsection set in Abu Dhabi gives us some real thrills, particularly a sequence involving a multi million dollar car crashing through multiple buildings. The eventual climax back in the homeland of Los Angeles involves predator drones, a pretty far cry from a franchise that used to be concerned with just car tricks. When part 5 was released, the Onion newspaper hilariously pontificated that its screenwriter Chris Morgan was actually a kindergartner. He continues to write these pictures and by my math, he’d be in fourth grade now. Sometimes it still feels as if an elementary student is writing the words here, but that’s not really the point. In Furious world, what counts is the adventure on the screen. And there’s plenty of excitement that James Wan (a new director to the series) conjures up here. It’s pretty simple. If you like this franchise, you’ll like what you see the seventh time around. And you might be a little surprised at how just a completely unsubtle series handles the loss of one its biggest stars with a subtle touch.

*** (out of four)

The Superman We Never Saw

When you’ve got yourself a documentary about a major Hollywood production that never ended up being made and its director Tim Burton isn’t the most eccentric individual being interviewed, you’re probably in for something fascinating. And so it is with The Death of Superman Lives: What Happened?, which tells the tale of why Burton’s proposed reimagining of the Man of Steel never made it to the screen.

The more eccentric character is by far Jon Peters, the mega producer who had successfully worked with Burton to bring Batman to the masses in 1989. The two were deep into pre-production on the late 1990s Superman Lives project before the plug was pulled and some of this doc’s greatest moments involve Peters being interviewed and, even more so, other people talking about him. Peters started out as Barbara Streisand’s hairdresser before becoming a major producing player. We hear tales of Peters’ insistence on having a giant spider featured in the film, his preference on having scripts read to him while he lays on the couch, his proclivity for putting employees in headlocks and trying out his jiu jitsu moves on underlings.

There’s a lot more to the story of how Superman Lives died and director/writer Jon Schnepp explores it in great detail here. This documentary has had its own difficult history in finally being released and it was partly funded through a Kickstarter campaign. The Supes reboot went through three screenwriters during its gestation: Kevin Smith at first, who brought his comic book geek sensibility before being jettisoned by Warner Bros brass, Peters, and Burton; Wesley Strick, who would eventually suffer the same fate; and its final writer Dan Gilroy, who would go onto direct my favorite pic of last year, Nightcrawler. Nicolas Cage was to star in the title role and there’s even fascinating footage of him trying on the iconic Superman costume, which the doc spends a lot of time talking delving into. In the late 1990s, Cage seemed like a fairly logical choice as he was coming off an Oscar for 1995’s Leaving Las Vegas and headlining A list action projects like The Rock, Con Air, and Face/Off.  In other words, it was a few years prior to Cage seemingly accepting every single script that came his way. Other casting choices are discussed, including Sandra Bullock as Lois Lane, Chris Rock as Jimmy Olsen, Christopher Walken as Brainiac, and Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor (that actor would go onto play him in 2006’s Superman Returns).

What emerges from the documentary is a film about a film never made (it was three weeks away from shooting) that probably would’ve been something to behold. Would it have been good? Hard to say. The two subsequent Superman reboots that would follow years later (the aforementioned Superman Returns and 2013’s Man of Steel) were both rather disappointing in my view and many comic book lovers felt the same way. Burton’s track record over the last quarter century has been hit and miss. While his take on Batman was a rousing success, his “reimagining” of Planet of the Apes in 2001 left much to be desired. What’s clear is that it would have been a much different Superman than we’ve ever seen and would have looked a whole lot different (the long portions about its production design are quite intriguing).

One important through line that runs in the doc is the fact that Superman Lives was by no means guaranteed massive success in the late 1990s. We must remember that it wasn’t until the turn of the century that 2000’s X-Men truly helped usher in the golden age of comic book flicks that we’ve seen steadily over the last 15 years. When this project was gestating, 1997’s Batman and Robin had essentially killed that Caped Crusader franchise until Chris Nolan brought it back to life eight years later. Warner Bros. was nervous about a similar fate for Burton’s new project. Ironically, it was Batman and Robin director Joel Schumacher who killed Burton’s Batman series and helped pump the brakes on Burton’s budding Superman picture.

For comic book lovers, The Death of Superman Lives: What Happened? will be a treasure trove of intel on why this project never saw the light of day. Yet for movie fans in general, it provides key insight into how movies are made… and how some aren’t made. And how its possibly crazy main producer was obsessed with spiders and jui jitsu.

Ex Machina Movie Review

Alex Garland’s Ex Machina shares similar themes of romance with an artificial intelligence being to that of Spike Jonze’s Her. Oh, but the tone is quite different. This low budget sci-fi feature announces a director with a visual style not unlike Kubrick and one suspects we’ll be seeing lots more from Garland in the future. We’ve seen similar material before, but never presented in the manner it is here and that makes Ex Machina an exciting experience.

The pic gets right into the plot as computer programmer Caleb (Domhnall Gleeson) is selected by his boss Nathan (Oscar Isaac) to travel to his gorgeous remote estate. Nathan is the founder and CEO of Bluebook, the largest search engine site in the world. Caleb is unsure of why he’s given this assignment but soon finds out that is to judge whether Nathan’s AI design Ava (Alicia Vikander) passes the Turing test. In other words, Caleb is to determine whether Ava passes for a human.

We witness their interaction through a series of sessions, with the eccentric, alcoholic, and probably dangerous Nathan monitoring their every moment of conversation. Almost. Intermittent periods of power blackouts allow Caleb and Ava to speak more frankly and Caleb soon discovers than Nathan’s intentions could be more sinister than he’s leading his employee to believe. As their sessions grow, Caleb develops an attraction for Ava and she becomes more and more human to him. She reciprocates his feelings.

The themes of the human race dealing with artificial intelligence in a sexual way are, once again, becoming a more common theme in cinema. Where Ex Machina succeeds is generating considerable tension in the dynamic between its two test subjects (there’s never much doubt Caleb is being tested too) and Nathan. Some of the movie’s most significant developments occur in the blackout periods generated by lost power and by Nathan’s love of hard liquor. We are constantly second guessing Nathan’s motives and soon begin to question Ava’s.

Isaac is given the juicy role here and he delivers another terrific performance once again. Gleeson is the straight man who convincingly plays the truly strange new world he’s found himself in. Yet Ex Machina hinges on the work of Vikander, who excels at creating this manufactured woman who quickly tugs at Caleb’s emotions.

There is no doubt that Garland is a real talent and he delivers a tight and often claustrophobic universe to let his three main players interact in (the only other major supporting player is Sonoyo Mizuno as Nathan’s non English speaking housemaid). With each subsequent session, the suspense escalates and we’re never quite sure where it’s all leading up to. When it does, the ending feels a tad predictable but also feels appropriate. This is not the sci-fi experience we’ve grown used to with an over reliance of effects. They’re here, but Ex Machina earns its worthiness from a director who confidently knows how to tell this story.

***1/2 (out of four)

Trainwreck Movie Review

In the past decade, we’ve witnessed Judd Apatow bring the best out of his comedic performers and vault them into big screen stardom. This has occurred in films he’s directed and produced. Steve Carell in The 40-Year-Old Virgin. Seth Rogen in Knocked Up. Kristin Wiig and Melissa McCarthy in Bridesmaids. It happens again in a major way with Trainwreck, which announces stand up comedian and star of her acclaimed Comedy Central program Amy Schumer as a force onscreen.

Simply out, Amy’s got the It Factor. The film (which she wrote, marking the first time Apatow isn’t directing his own material) allows her to showcase her already known comedy skills but also a surprising amount of depth with dramatic material. Trainwreck is both an anti romantic comedy and a very real one. Amy plays Amy, a writer for a trashy men’s magazine who grew with up a philandering and alcoholic dad (Colin Quinn) who preached his dislike for monogamy to Amy at an early age. Her younger sister (Brie Larson) didn’t get the memo and she’s living a suburban life with her sweater clad husband and stepson with a baby on the way. It’s an alien existence to Amy, who relishes her sexual freedom. She’s Daddy’s girl for certain.

An unwanted writing assignment gives her the task of profiling sports doctor Aaron (Bill Hader), medic to superstar athletes including his best bud Lebron James. Amy knows little about his field but soon does what she normally does and her one night stand with Aaron turns into something more. The two enter into a couple territory which petrifies her. He’s ready for it.

What follows is a pic that reverses the typical roles we’re used to seeing in the genre. Amy is more like the dude in this situation. Before her interaction with Aaron turns steady, this allows for some raunchy humor that we expect from the star and the director. A scene of dirty talk gone wrong with a Hulk like beau played by John Cena is a prime example.

Trainwreck, however, is often more serious than the trailers suggest. The subplots involving Amy’s family are treated with some somber undertones. A scene involving our central character at a funeral is wonderfully written and provides that aforementioned evidence of Schumer’s acting skills beyond  her ability to make us laugh.

The pic also provides more proof that Hader is a truly gifted performer and his chemistry with his costar is on point. Their union seems wholly believable and that’s a factor that’s sunk plenty of rom coms that fail. Not here at all.

Tilda Swinton is nearly unrecognizable as Amy’s shallow boss and she is given some amusing material to work with. The casting of Lebron could’ve felt purely like a gimmick, but his exaggerated version of playing himself (as a caring and sensitive cheapskate) is a trip.

This is ultimately Amy’s show though. Her screenplay’s mix of bawdiness with emotional substance usually plays well. There are times when the flaws of Apatow’s filmography creep in. Mainly, it could have certainly been about 20 minutes shorter (a staple with Judd). There’s also a bizarre film within a film displayed a couple times with Daniel Radcliffe and Marisa Tomei that adds nothing.

Where Trainwreck so often works is showcasing the real talent (in front of the camera and on the page) of its star. Schumer is satirizing the genre and also celebrating it, especially as it nears its conclusion. Like her relationship with Aaron, Trainwreck is a little bit messy. Like the character she plays, Trainwreck lacks a little bit of focus. It’s worth it in the end I must say. That applies to the union of our two lead cast members and the movie itself.

*** (out of four)

Ted 2 Movie Review

Like many comedy sequels before it, Ted 2 often has a troubling time justifying its own existence. Seth MacFarlane’s follow-up to his wildly successful 2012 hit finds the director a bit more unshackled with choreographed musical numbers and more abundant political humor. This doesn’t achieve the effect of making this more funny. To go down a cliched road, Ted 2 is bearable but struggles a bit to come to life.

When we open, Ted is tying the knot with girlfriend Tami-Lynn (Jessica Barth) and things are going smoothly in the talking bear’s world. Not so much for Johnny (Mark Wahlberg), who’s down on his luck after divorcing Lori (Mila Kunis, who doesn’t appear). Within a year, Ted and Tami-Lynn are fighting and they figure a solution to their problems may be a baby. Since Ted is anatomically challenged in that area, adoption comes into play and after Tom Brady humorously rejects the notion of being a sperm donor, it’s left to Ted’s longtime friend. It all leads down a dangerous road where Ted is eventually deemed not to be a person by the state and this is where our main characters enlist new lawyer and pothead Sam (Amanda Seyfried) to help.

Ted 2 clumsily draws comparisons of Ted’s plight to that of gays and African Americans. We expect nothing less from MacFarlane than seriously un-PC comedy, yet these jokes fall flat more frequently than they hit. In fact, nearly everything here just simply cannot match the freshness of the original. Returning characters like the Ted obsessed Donny (Giovanni Ribisi) and Sam Jones (Flash Gordon if you recall) aren’t granted moments as uproarious as we’ve seen before. Whereas the relationship of Johnny and Lori was a strength in Ted, the forced romance between Johnny and Sam adds little.

Even with all those negatives, like a middling Family Guy episode, there are genuine laughs to be had. Many are throwaway lines and sight gags and MacFarlane and his cowriters Alec Sulkin and Wellesley Wild are too talented not to have some of the material succeed. Certain celeb cameos work more than others – Liam Neeson’s is a trip. There’s also smile inducing references to 80s genre classics of the past including The Breakfast Club and Planes, Trains and Automobiles. And Morgan Freeman (as a top civil rights lawyer) is put to decent use mainly due to his voice, as Ted aptly points out when they meet.

As I began though, the sequels that populate film comedy usually can’t match what made its predecessor special. That holds true here and its occasionally preachy overtones don’t help. Ted 2 made this big admirer of the original sometimes happy, but not enough to warrant its second life on the screen.

**1/2 (out of four)

It Follows Movie Review

David Robert Mitchell’s low budget horror tale It Follows is set in what appears to be a suspended period of time. In the very first scene, we hear a cell phone trying to catch the attention of a young girl in distress. What follows is a parade of landline phones, small screen TVs, actual magazines of pornography and, most horrifically, jean jackets. I suspect this is due to my feeling that its writer/director wishes he could’ve made this picture in the 1980s when John Carpenter and others were making their B movies of the genre. This is clearly where the main influence of It Follows lies and much of this minimalist homage works quite well.

The stars of the pic are not the actors who populate it, but mainly its cinematographer Mike Gioulakis and musical composer Disasterpeace. The movie is filled with remarkable camerawork and shots that will stay with you while its 80s inspired score is a gem.

As for the movie itself, It Follows cleverly reverses a well known cliche in the genre. From the advent of the slasher flick, it’s been the act of sex that often gets our teen characters in the most trouble. While that also holds true here, it’s the same physical act that apparently rids you of the film’s curse.

So just what is “It”? That’s what our main heroine and high schooler Jay (Maika Monroe) must learn after she hooks up with a college dude who then proceeds to inform her that their carnal act will not just involve a walk of shame. In fact, through sex, he’s passed along a curse. The cursed are then proceeded to be followed and terrorized by an entity that can take any form and that only they can see. It’s only, she’s told, through passing it her along herself that she can rid herself of it.

Jay’s predicament soon involves her friends trying to help her out and this includes an eventual love triangle with the cool jean jacket sporting neighbor and her nerdier jean jacket sporting longtime friend. At times, It Follows doesn’t even appear to follow its own rules and the origin of the entity is never explained.

Yet that’s not the point here. The origin doesn’t really need to be explained. The pic is aimed squarely at stoking the nostalgia for the low budget horror titles from the three decades past and that’s where it often succeeds. I’ll confess that I didn’t find it as scary as its reputation has suggested, but there’s certainly some white knuckle moments. The cinematography and music stuck with this viewer the most and its craftsmanship in those areas left me most impressed.

*** (out of four)

A Deadly Adoption Movie Review

A Deadly Adoption marks by far what has been one of the more intriguing movie experiences in recent times. In April of this year, news leaked that Will Ferrell and Kristin Wiig were making a Lifetime flick. And not just making… it had already been shot and was supposed to air in secret and let the channel’s viewers discover on their own that a pair of film comedy’s biggest stars were in it. The audacity factor alone is commendable and Ferrell was reportedly upset when the leak occurred. For two months, we’ve been left wondering whether A Deadly Adoption would play more like a spoof or if the filmmakers would commit to truly shooting a run of the mill Lifetime pic.

The answer is the latter and it’s about as disconcerting as it sounds. Here we have Ferrell as Robert, a well known financial advice author with Wiig’s Sarah as his organic food stand owning wife. As we open, Sarah is pregnant with the couple’s second child. The baby is lost when she has a slow motion accident slipping off the dock of their fancy New England home. It scars them both, but leaves Robert overly protective of his first born daughter who is, of course, diabetic.

Soon they have the possibility of adopting a baby boy from the six months pregnant bombshell Bridget (Jessica Lowndes). She moves in with the couple and soon, in Lifetime fashion, twists and turns keep coming. When I say true Lifetime fashion – I mean it. This is the 25th year that the network has been in the movie business and their hundreds of efforts are mostly interchangeable. A Deadly Adoption stands out solely because of surprising talent that chose to be involved. Yet it’s played straight with all the time tested cliches we’ve come to anticipate. In addition to the diabetic youngster, there’s the gay best friend. The bad cell phone reception. The alcoholism and infidelity.

The fear from me is that this experiment would feel like that and only that. It often holds true, but I’ll be damned if the sight of Ferrell and Wiig doing this isn’t occasionally humorous. Does it sustain its novelty factor for 85 minutes? Not really, but the final scene pays off by being the only one going for genuine laughs and it worked for me. There’s also a moment when the organic loving Sarah has to turn down Bridget’s food request for a big bowl of ice cream. She feels bad turning down the guilty pleasure hunger desires of her expectant guest. For a quarter century, these Lifetime movies have been a lot of people’s big bowl of ice cream. Seeing the two leads join in the ridiculousness is surreal but works better than it probably should.

**1/2 (out of four)