LOVERBOY (1989)

Directed By: Joan Micklin Silver
Written By: Robin Schiff, Leslie Dixon & Tom Ropelewski
Story By: Robin Schiff 
Cinematography: John Hora
Editor: Rick Shaine 

Cast: Patrick Dempsey, Kirstie Alley, Kate Jackson, Robert Ginty, Dylan Walsh, Nancy Valen, Barbara Carrera, Vic Tayback, Bernie Coulson, Kim Miyori, Carrie Fisher, Robert Picardo, E.G. Daily 

Randy is still unfocused after 2 years in college. His dad will no longer pay tuition and Randy gets a job delivering pizzas. Several cute cougars pay him $200 for pizza delivery and “services rendered”. Their husbands?


This is the final chapter in the unofficial teenage sex comedies starring Patrick Dempsey. That started with CAN’T BUY ME LOVE and continued with IN THE MOOD and this is the finale. Unless you want to count HEAVEN HELP US in which he had a smaller supporting role and SOME GIRLS. Which was much more dramatic.

This film is what one would consider a seat filler. As a movie that seemed more simple and meant to fill seats and hopefully win the box office for a week or two. Rather than any concerns about quality. As on face Value, this film seems rather simple about a college kid forced to work and who lucks into being a gigolo for older married women.

You would expect more a sex comedy that was more concerned with T & A, but surprisingly though it has it’s fair share of juvenile humor and cheap jokes. It surprisingly has heart also as it doesn’t focus so much on sex, but more on romance and making women feel beautiful and their full worth. That their husbands have seemed to have stopped or given up. 

One of the reasons that this film might be more intended for a female audience is that it has a softer touch due to the direction of Joan Micklin Silver who had directed more independent dramas before this and this film seeming her one chance at more of a mainstream big studio release.

While the film has Its laughs and a surprisingly stacked cast considering its premise. It also allows for aortic Dempsey to show off his physical comedy skills. Is more of a surprising romantic male lead with an atrocious dye job at the beginning of the film. 

I remember watching this film. In The theater when it came out. As I did with CAN’T BUY NE LOVE. While that film affected me more. As I couldn’t wait to see it based on all the commercials and being a fan of Patrick Dempsey this film was perfectly fine and keeps you entertained. It didn’t have what I was expecting but it offered a nice surprise. That actually manages to offer some substance and polish.

Grade: C+

SWITCH (1991)

Written & Directed By: Blake Edwards 
Cinematography: Dick Bush 
Editor: Robert Pergament 

Cast: Ellen Barkin, Jimmy Smits, Perry King, JoBeth Williams, Lorraine Bracco, Tony Roberts, Bruce Payne, Lynette Anthony, Victoria Mahoney, Basil Hoffman, Catherine Keener, Kevin Kilner, David Wohl, Tea Leoni, Jim J. Bullock, Rick Aiello 

Steve Brooks is a sexist and the prototype macho. Unfortunately one day he is killed by one of his girlfriends. In heaven, though, there is no place for men like him and he is sent back to earth in the body of a woman so that he can see how women are treated by men like the one he once was.


Initially, it seemed this was a movie that was going to be a comedy of comeuppance and body-switching that had a kind of. Resurgence with moves like VICE VERSA, LIKE FATHER LIKE SON and 18 AGAIN or the teenage version SOMETHING SPECIAL 

This film is definitely outdated. The premise is Intriguing when it came out and caused some controversy when it did. It seems like a movie that is intentionally trying to be provocative and subtle In its own way. 

Watching it now it seems a bit tame but it does feel like a lothario male getting his come upance and Learning life lessons as having to go through life as an adult woman to try and get into heaven.

Learning through trials and tribulations. Though the film is trying to be pro-female and their rights. It still comes off as sexist. While allowing for plenty of sex scenes and nudity that it comes off as a sexual farce. 

The film does have Its fair share of funny scenes and Ellen Barkin is really Terrific in the lead role. Showing she has comedic timing and is thoroughly believable throughout. This is actually one of her better and more memorable roles. Where she isn’t necessarily the bad girl sexpot for a change. Normally this would have been more of a star-making role for her. As it is one of her unfortunately few leading roles in a film.  

Though the third act is rough. Having a child by means of drunken encounter pretty much seems at least as far as the character goes as date rape as she didn’t really give consent and finding a kind of happiness afterward with her best male friend who falls for him In Female form. 

Though ridiculous it doesn’t come off as physical or far-fetched as his previous movie SKIN DEEP. As here it seems that legendary writer/director Blake Edwards is trying and has invested interest in this film. Though he definitely seems to be trying to push some buttons when it comes to the subjects. While at times crasser than it needs to be. It definitely is more outdated than expected

There is still plenty of physical comedy throughout which is his specialty and some satire though towards the end it gets more serious and dramatic from its sillier early antics. 

Though this caused a bit of controversy at the time. This might have been a film that was made too early or too late for the times. As it is certainly a high concept and would have probably been more insulting than thought-provoking if made in the 1980s

The film also treats the killing of the main character so easily as flippant and more like a plot device rather than needed or really felt. As he never lied to these women so their murder seems madder at themselves for falling for him. Not only that but the film treats the fact that he was promiscuous as more his major sin and maybe his attitude towards women as we never Hear or even see him really treat any of the women. So the film generalized and tries to make a point figuring the audience will go with it 

Grade: C+

PUMPKIN (2002)

Directed by: Anthony Abrams & Adam Larson Broder
Written By: Adam Larson Broder 
Cinematography: Tim Shurstedt
Editor: Richard Halsey & Sloane Klevin 

Cast: Christina Ricci, Hank Harris, Brenda Blethyn, Dominique Swain, Marisa Coughlan, Sam Ball, Harry Lennix, Nina Foch, Caroline Aaron, Melissa McCarthy, Julio Oscar Mechoso, Michael Bacall, Erin Bartlett, Amy Adams, Michelle Kruseic, Shaun Weiss 

Perky, perfect Carolyn and her Alpha Omega Pi sisters plan to win Sorority of the Year by impressing the Greek Council with a killer charity: coaching mentally challenged athletes for the regional Challenged Games. When Carolyn’s assigned to coach Pumpkin she’s terrified at first, but soon sees in him something she’s never seen before: gentle humanity and honest clarity that touches her soul. To the horror of her friends and Pumpkin’s overprotective mother, Carolyn falls in love, becoming an outcast in the process. As Carolyn’s “perfect life” falls apart, Pumpkin teaches her that perfect isn’t always perfect after all.


This film tries to be subversive in that it tries to satirize 1950s forbidden romance melodramas. While also trying to be one with a few modern sensibilities. As well as more humor that tends to be cynical at times.

Where it seems like the whole world will be shattered because of this romance between a sorority college girl and a mentally challenged man she meets while trying to do charity work.

That at times can be seen as in bad taste, but ultimately remains sweet. 

Most of the characters here come across as stereotypes at first until the film allows them to show more depth. At first, it seems fairly typical but then becomes more subversive.

Though there is sex it is delivered in a more subdued manner, Except for one scene.

The film plays more like a teenage melodrama. Though too mature for them. So it might appeal to college-aged audiences. It is also a film full of bright colors 

The film seems to try to be naughty and a little controversial to gain more interest. Almost like a stunt, but as it goes along proves itself to be a little more conventional.

Though it does show a nice transition for the characters. From living their lives in a kind of young dreamworld and then being awakened to the harsh truth of reality and the world outside of college.

The soundtrack is very catchy and achieves a life of its own. As I was obsessed with it and one particular song immediately after watching the film. It ended up being the thing I remember most about the film:

The reason I discovered it was the cast. Especially Star Christina Ricci. As this was a time when she seemed to be the independent film girl. After BUFFALO’ 66 and THE OPPOSITE OF SEX. Though this doesn’t rise to the same level as those films. Here she gives an earnest performance. As most of the film is built around her character.

This feels like a film that is missing writer/director John Waters’ touch as he might have made it a little more sharp and grotesque to a degree. Though the filmmakers here seem to win for his territory with a little more modesty and sweetness, that can be bitter, with touches of bad taste. Lacking the camp needed. As a throwback to simple times and exposing the ridiculous class traditions with humor 

GRADE: C

I CARE A LOT (2020)

Written & Directed By: J. Blakeson 
Cinematography: Doug Emmett 
Editor: Mark Eckersley 

Cast: Rosamund Pike, Peter Dinklage, Eiza Gonzalez, Dianne Wiest, Alicia Witt, Chris Messina, Isiah Whitlock Jr., Macon Blair, Damian Young, Nicholas Logan 

A crooked legal guardian who drains the savings of her elderly wards meets her match when a woman she tries to swindle turns out to be more than she first appears.


This can easily be a polarizing film. On the one hand you have a savvy businesswoman who makes her career conning people out of their livelihood. So no one was ever going to find her likable or an adequate anti-hero.

Though we have seen films before where we have male protagonists who do the same thing and are more remembered and celebrated by audiences. Even if they are more disposable and waste the money on frivolous luxuries and vices.

What is more upsetting for an audience here is that not only is the protagonist doing this female. Where usually films treat female characters like her as damaged or coming around at the last minute or femme Fatales who get a comeuppance. More or less she keeps striving no matter the challenge or difficulty and ultimately what she traps comes back to her in worse ways. The same is never made of the antiheroes who are male in other films; they get a snack down but never so severe.

Though truth be told those movies are usually more based on specific people and cases. Here this is a made-up story of a very real cool. Games that are happening more and more. Only for intents and purposes here do we get a face with this type of crime. As well as more of a story.

What also might be upsetting is that in real-life cases there are faces and representatives of the victims. Usually late in the films when they are winding down. For us to realize the destruction and evils of the character even if not planned what the end results of their con games are for some. Here they are picking on the already defenseless the elderly. Which is the equivalent of kicking or torturing an animal on screen these days. Instantly turning the audience against your protagonist. Especially if they were being attacked by them.

So this film already gives you an unlikeable protagonist but also the film is filled with unlikeable characters. Even when you might start to feel for some of them. They show their true colors and you go right back to hating them.

I applaud throwing the audience off but when there is no one to root for. As the characters seem to compete for who is the worst and trying to make excuses for their behavior. It’s not really enjoyable even for a dark comedy.

The film is trying to tackle a subject and knows the best way to inform the audience is from an insider. As the film might be cynical but doesn’t offer false notes. As everyone is flawed and there is no heart of gold that comes through. This film presents a more scrubbed clean dog eat dog world. That is all about survival above all else.

It’s not necessarily an enjoyable film but like the characters it tries to make you as comfortable as you can be while watching these events unfold and tries to add some humor to the proceedings 

Rosamund Pike is excellent in the starring role. Even though it seems every few years she plays this type of role. A character who at first seems like a pushover but then reveals herself to be a shark. So it’s refreshing to see her play such strong female characters every so often. Making you wonder why she isn’t offered more roles. It might be as in these roles she comes off as threatening usually to male protagonists. Some might feel uncomfortable casting her in easier or less challenging roles?

Though at least the film is thought-provoking and wouldn’t expect anything else from writer Director J. Blakeson, Especially after his film THE DISAPPEARANCE OF ALICE CREED 

The film is upsetting for anyone looking for good to conquer evil. It is a dark and cynical comedy with heavy overtones. Though it isn’t bad or disappointing, just unlikeable.

Grade: B-

THE COLUMNIST (2019)

Directed By: Ivo Van Aart 
Written By: Daan Windhorst
Cinematography: Martijn Cousijn 
Editor: Irme Reutelingsperger & Yamal Stitiou 

Cast: Katja Herbers, Achraf Koutet, Genio De Groot, Rein Hoffman, Claire Porro, Bram Van Der Kelen, Medina Schuurman, Harry Van Ritjthourn 

A columnist must continuously deal with threats and negative comments on her social media pages. One day, she has had enough and decides to hunt down her trolls.


The film wastes no time in getting right to the point and its actions. The film ends up going down like candy-sweet and quickly with very few complaints. 

The film comes off very dry and seems to have no real sensations at all throughout the film. Especially when it comes to presentation.

Feels very lightweight for such a dark comedy. Almost like a TV movie level. Only with plenty of language and violence.

It might have been stronger if at any point she really has faced a true challenge or more of one in her killings or the immediate aftermath. 

The only other being she seems to face is the older gentleman who at first seems like he could be the easiest.

As she became too common too fast and with very little investigation into these Crimes. So there feels like an absence of any real depth. Especially when the film offers opportunities for it to be more interesting. Like having the daughter act impulsively when thinking her mother’s boyfriend is the killer or having her kill him when believing him to be the killer. Then found out she was wrong when the kills keep happening and then finding out it was her mother or ending the film with the daughter’s Mistake.

In the middle of the movie is the only town where the police really have any questions and she gives them motive and a bit of evidence to build a case if they bothered to really investigate her. 

The killings soon become an obsession. So much so that it takes over her regular responsibilities. Truly shows her character’s transformation. The more she kills the more it relieves her mind as it clears her head and gets more writing done. In essence, becoming more successful.

As it seems she is all for freedom of speech until it is used against her then she becomes the ultimate censor. At first, she is bullied into being a killer. 

Though without controversy there is less of an audience. The end is a little outlandish as it seems meant to be a message. As the film does have one in a worst-case scenario version. That could be reworked but makes itself loud and clear. 

At first, it seems Like it will be open-ended but proceeds especially as there are plenty of witnesses though goes for shock and sensationalism with a warning. 

Her speech might help her and the film to realize what she says about herself goes to the victims also. 

Just her boyfriend who dresses freaky to get attention as fashion is the more normal put-together individual. Whereas she comes off as the more so-called normal one is the crazed killer.

In the end, the film feels disposable and hassle-free.

Grade: C+

28 DAYS (2000)

Directed By: Betty Thomas 
Written By: Susannah Grant 
Cinematography: Declan Quinn
Editor: Peter Teschner 

Cast: Sandra Bullock, Elizabeth Perkins, Viggo Mortensen, Dominic West, Margo Martindale, Diane Ladd, Reni Santoni, Alan Tudyk, Azura Skye, Steve Buscemi, Michael O’Malley, Marianne Jean-Baptiste, Susan Krebs 

A big-city newspaper columnist is forced to enter a drug and alcohol rehab center after ruining her sister’s wedding and crashing a stolen limousine.


This movie is charming in its own way.  As it is primarily a comedy but it gets deeply dramatic and doesn’t always provide a happy ending. 

This movie marked a difference In Sandra Bullock’s career. Where she seemed more interested in trying to stretch past her girl next door image and have more edge to her but also kind of realized her limitations. So she was trying to have a middle ground here. 

The film is too light to really be too hard-hitting, but gets to the emotional landscapes that it needs to and hits those aspects hard.

It’s a relief to watch a film where there is a hint of romance but treats it more for what it is a connection that can easily be read as a distraction from your true problems. 

While Sandra bullock is engaging it’s the side characters that really pepper the film

And make it spicy. They are also more the heart and dramatic pulls of the movie. Luckily though Sandra bullock is clearly the star. She lets the supporting characters breathe enough for us to care about them. Even if some stay one-dimensional.

Even though in hindsight the plotline with Azura Skye’s character would have been more recognizable and maybe a more informed outcome. Though she is one of the more heartbreaking. Elements of the film And definitely memorable characters. 

Though Viggo Mortensen comes into this film Like a true movie star and makes his presence felt he still feels more like a minor element to the film As a whole. Whose most dramatic and Piercing scene is a throwaway one at a gas stop. Though throughout the oozes charisma.

Though when the film hits her dramatic past. It does feel right and strong. Yet luckily never quite overdramatic. 

When I first saw the film I wasn’t prepared as it seemed to ride the middle as far as genres and quality. Watching it again recently though it might not have a typical happy ending film Makes you feel comfortable. As the film is infinitely rewatchable.

The only problem with the film Might be that In trying to be so many different things instead of going in-depth it kind of flirts and gives a bit, little too passable when it comes to everything. 

We are just given enough to feel or be informed about characters, situations, and the road to recovery. While feeling a bit spiritual but not the hokey hippie kind.

In the end, it shows the power and charisma of Actress Sandra Bullock that lasts to this day. As she is one of the last true stars of the big screen. Where audiences follow her no matter what genre of film she stars in and is still usually a hit of some kind. Yet she never comes across as the stereotype of a star. 

Grade: B-

R100 (2013)

Directed By: Hitoshi Matsumoto
Written By: Hitoshi Matsumoto, Mitsuyoshi Takasu, Timoji Hasegawa, Koji Ema & Mitsuru Kuramoto

Cinematography: Kazunari Tanaka
Editor: Yoshitaka Honda

Cast: Nao Omori, Mao Daichi, Shinbu Terajima, Hari Katagri, Ai Tominaga, Eriko Sato, Naomi Watanabe, Lindsay Hayward

An ordinary man with an ordinary life joins a mysterious club. The membership lasts for one year only and there is one rule: no cancellation under any circumstance. The man enters into a whole new exciting world he never before experienced where crazy love goes wilder and crazier. Is it an illusion or is it real? Welcome to the world no one has dared to explore until now!


The first act of this film is interesting, yet quickly becomes infuriating. As it introduces and lays the groundwork but then there seem like long scenes of repetition, long takes, and boredom.

The dominatrix scenes at least offer up what looks like random one-sided action scenes. Where we watch the main character go through many types of torture from various Dominatrixes and they each have a different specialty. That they come off almost as action hero henchmen or villains themselves. 

The film from time to time offers commentary by the film audience seemingly verbalizing what the actual viewing audience watching the film is probably feeling or thinking or wanting to say and pointing out flaws. While also giving the film a meta element and thus another layer. 

Once we get to the second act the film picks up as it doubles down on the out-there elements. Where the film comes off where it was already supposed to be more comedic. 

Until we get to the over-the-top third act. Which involves more action, fantasy, and chases that feel more convenient while still keeping its odd quality about it.

I really tried to get into the film And it’s a ridiculous premise. I will admit it was a challenge and while I can certainly say it’s different. I can’t say it was very enjoyable.

The film tries to break down a lot in explications and randomness. What is supposed to be comedic introduces randomness that constantly makes the film non-coherent and fully self-contained. Yet the first half still feels a bit monotonous. Even as it constantly aims for absurdism. 

Even as the film’s title reveals an inside joke. You know that it has a constant sense of humor about itself. In Japan, R18 is a rating that means no one under 18 is allowed to see it . As they will not understand the film. So this film’s title being R100 means it’s so disturbing that no one or at least no one under the age of 100 should watch it. As they won’t understand it. Which one can see? 

Grade: C

READY TO WEAR (PRET-A-PORTER) (1994)

Directed By: Robert Altman 
Written By: Robert Altman & Barbara Shulgasser
Cinematography: Jean Lepine & Pierre Mignot
Editor: Suzy Elmiger & Geraldine Peroni

Cast: Julia Roberts, Tim Robbins, Marcello Mastroianni, Sophia Loren, Lili Taylor, Forest Whitaker, Richard E. Grant, Rupert Everett, Kim Basinger, Sally Kellerman, Tracy Ullman, Lauren Bacall,  Linda Hunt, Stephen Rea, Ute Lemper, Lyle Lovett, Teri Garr, Danny Arielle, Jean-Pierre Cassel, Amouk Aimee, Chiara Mastroianni, Rossy De Palma, Michel Blanc, Jean Rochefort, Francois Cluzet, Sam Robarbs, Georgianna Robertson 

A fashion show in Paris draws the usual bunch of people; designers, reporters, models, magazine editors, photographers. Lots of unconnected stories which all revolve around this show, and an all-star cast.


This was my third official Robert Altman movie to see. Though unfortunately not in a row. I remember the film having a successful music video and soundtrack before it even came out. Unfortunately the movie didn’t match the soundtrack’s success. That included the hit single “HERE COMES THE HOT STEPPER” 

After the success of THE PLAYER it seemed like Robert Altman was having a comeback and he wanted to take on another world/culture. His last film was SHORT CUTS and that was more interlocking stories then taking a look into or try to dismantle another popular subculture from the inside. That was more foreign abs international but also glamorous.

Allowing him to use his dual methods of ensemble casts. Where even though the actors are playing characters here it feels more like an out and out comedy. So they are all over the top. Not as serious, nor are there any serious moments throughout. 

It might be understandable him taking on this movie after the more serious and sad SHORT CUTS, but while this is more lighthearted it also is a challenge. As this would be his most mainstream film in a while. As he was taking on a subject that was very popular and most audiences might not be used to his films and their outlook. 

This film is set in that world of fashion to tell ongoing stories and big inertia where the characters cross paths. All in all, it stays humorous with Kim Basinger playing an on air television reporter. Who comes in and out to explain certain relationships but is clueless about fashion. So that it feels like a replay of the reporter in the film NASHVILLE.

The film ultimately never encapsulates any meaning or why we are so enraptured by the glitz, glamour and celebrity of the fashion world. So that in the end it comes across as misguided and empty as the world he is capturing. As fashion constantly reinvents itself. It proves there are No rules and seemingly no depth. Not to mention watching this film feels dated. It’s very episodic. 

Marcello Mastroianni and Sophia Loren get to reference classic scenes and relationships from their career and previous collaborations and give a scene where you believe they are remaking a classic moment only for it to end with a joke. 

Which is pretty much the mood of the film. As all plots and stories seem to end in that kind of manner. 

The film’s cast as usual is filled with stars. The biggest of whom seem here in an unneeded story but help make it more commercial. As Tim Robbins and Julia Robert’s seem stuck here in a bad afterthought of a romantic comedy plot line.

This film seems to find Robert Altman riding his high horse. This film goes for more populism but leaves viewers puzzled. As it is more artistic and voyeuristic than plotted.

This film is like a bunch of short stories stretched over fashion week. 

The film is flashy and appeals to itself but ultimately is frustrating, especially with all the talent involved. Where you are left to wonder what could have been. 

Everyone is well dressed but we are left as confused as Kim Basinger’s reporter. Where we wonder what this was all about. 

It seems like the director was unfocused but having fun. Filled with recognizable names, good actors, supermodels and models of the time. Where the film feels flirtatious as it always has a wink to give off 

Can’t tell if the film was rushed or cut together fast with a murder mystery in the middle that largely takes a backseat or is forgotten. Ultimately the film comes across as a farce. That feels like it is being made up as it goes along. Though with a stylish hand guiding it. Who leaves to perplex the audience. 

Grade: C+

MISS CONGENIALITY 2: ARMED & FABULOUS (2005)

Directed By: John Pasquin
Written By: Marc Lawrence 
Based on Characters Created by: Marc Lawrence, Katie Ford & Caryn Lucas 
Cinematography: Peter Menzies Jr. 
Editor: Garth Craven 

Cast: Sandra Bullock, Regina King, Enrique Murciano, William Shatner, Ernie Hudson, Heather Burns, Diedrich Bader, Treat Williams, Abraham Benrubi, Nick Offerman, Eileen Brennan, Octavia Spencer, Elisabeth Rohm, Stephen Tobolowsky, Leslie Grossman, Eve Gordon, Affion Crockett, Adam LeFevre 

F.B.I. Agent Gracie Hart is assigned to promote the F.B.I., touring with the brutal Agent Sam Fuller as her bodyguard. While traveling around the country, her friend and the Miss United States Cheryl Frasier is kidnapped along with Stan Fields, and Gracie decides to investigate the abduction in Las Vegas on her own, and against the direct orders of local F.B.I. Assistant Director Walter Collins. 


After the surprise success and enjoyment of the first film. Most I can imagine would think this would naturally be pleasing? No

First of all the series gets rid of Benjamin Bratt’s character and all hope of a love interest with him. So that this film can focus on more two mismatched partners working together. While taking matters differently. So in other words this becomes more of a buddy comedy with the audience having a history with at least one of the partners.

In the first film, it seems there was more room for side characters to make their mark. As they seemed to have something to do and were allowed to be as funny as the lead. Instead of just feeling like suspects and a plot device.

Sandra Bullock’s performance here seems more indebted to vaudeville. As she is more at the center of things but also seems more silly and wants to dress up in silly disguises.

Regina king is really the only one who has a chance to come through with her head held high. In making this a buddy comedy, just a more female-centered one that feels more predictable than the first film but also more stilted and outdated even for the time period in which it was made.

The film doesn’t feel as fun or silly as Ms. Bullock’s performance and the fun she seems to be having. Even as the situations and script get sillier. As do William Shatner and the usually hilarious Heather Burns in their roles.

As usual when a formulaic film is likable and comes as a surprise enjoyable hit. The sequel tries to replicate the formula all wrong. As it seems to be focusing on the wrong chemistry and elements. Leaving the product lacking in flavor that the first one brought that made audiences enjoy it in the first place.

It’s a shame as Regina king is a good and enjoyable actress, especially with the right material. But this is the second sequel where she plays a tough-as-nails thankless buddy in a buddy comedy that is bad (LEGALLY BLONDE 2 Is the other) she deserves better.

One can guess most of us expected the same from Sandra Bullock as she seems such a likable screen presence and films she stars in are usually enjoyable and passable but her me while she seems to be having fun. Watching this feels like the equivalent of homework

Grade: C-

STEP SISTERS (2018)

Directed By: Charles Stone III 
Written By: Chuck Hayward 
Cinematography By: Christopher Baffa 
Editor: Matt Friedman 

Cast: Megalyn Eichikunwoke, Lyndon Smith, Gage Golightly, Eden Sher, Marque Richardson, Alessandra Torresani, Naturi Naughton, Sheryl Lee Ralph, Matt McGorry, Robert Curtis Brown


Jamilah has her whole life figured out. She’s the president of her sorority, captain of their champion step dance crew, is student liaison to the college dean, and her next move is on to Harvard Law School. She’s got it all, right? But when the hard-partying white girls from Sigma Beta Beta embarrass the school, Jamilah is ordered to come to the rescue. Her mission is to not only teach the rhythmically-challenged girls how to step dance, but to win the Steptacular, the most competitive of dance competitions. With the SBBs reputations and charter on the line, and Jamilah’s dream of attending Harvard in jeopardy, these outcast screw-ups and their unlikely teacher stumble through one hilarious misstep after another. Cultures clash, romance blossoms, and sisterhood prevails as everyone steps out of their comfort zones.


This is a cute film that tries to say something. About diversity and races coming together. Now of course you know what this type of film you are going to get so if Looking for something more deep or artistic you know you aren’t going to find it here.

If you are looking for something light, fun, and mildly Funny this is the film for you. In a lot of ways, it reminds me of BRING IT ON for its light yet biting attitude.

It feels a bit like a combination of films like bring it on and the dance movie series like STEP UP only less focused on romance and more focused on stepping.

I enjoyed the film making the black sorority characters threatening but not villains and open-minded.

You won’t believe any of the endings this Film goes for feel good and promotes equality, but the actions of the characters just feel false but again this is the type of film where you just have to accept it as it isn’t Shakespeare.

The film is written by Chuck Hayward who is a successful tv-writer he writes for DEAR WHITE PEOPLE and I recognize plenty of cast members from that show sprinkled throughout as well as actors who worked on his previous projects.

Everyone seems perfectly cast as this has the fun of DEAR WHITE PEOPLE but not the impact or heaviness when it comes to the story.

I am happy to see actress Megalyn Eichikunwoke finally getting a lead role after seeing her play good supporting performances in movies like DAMSELS IN DISTRESS. Here she shines and shows she has star quality.

The race material is fun and is kept in the foreground for moments and ongoing plots but as the film goes along it melts away and just shows people are people and characters have many different shades and levels.

One point I did like was her having an overly sensitive liberal Caucasian boyfriend who goes over the low. In his liberal beliefs gives an attitude that blacks always need help or a handout. His heart is in the right place but he can’t see how he is minorly insulting.

It’s also interesting in the beginning the character is seen as more down with her race she is in an interracial relationship and when she finally opens herself to others and other races she is interested in an African American character for dating.

This is a film that makes the action happen fast, as to not bore the audience. it gets raunchy but PG-13 raunchy. So it is perfect for teens and good for an afternoon movie to have fun with and put you In a good mood probably forgetting it soon after. Quality enough though. It’s a film that might be more fun on the big screen but it is a Netflix release. Made for that type of home audience. As studios rarely put money in low to mid-budget projects anymore especially with teen comedies. Where it is more of a minor gamble.

Though there seems to be a drought of films such as these that seem built in to have crossover appeal. It would seek more natural theatrical release as it does provide the familiarity of material and broad stereotypes that it seeks to disprove and have fun with. Meant to open the minds of the characters and maybe even some audience members.

Grade: C+