The Shop Around the Corner (1940)

"There might be a lot we don't know about each other. You know, people seldom go to the trouble of scratching the surface of things to find the inner truth."

Director
Ernst Lubitsch

Cast
Margaret Sullavan - Klara Novak
James Stewart - Alfred Kralik
Frank Morgan - Hugo Matuschek
Joseph Schildkraut - Ferencz Vadas
Sara Haden - Flora Kaczek
Felix Bressart - Pirovitch
William Tracy - Pepi Katona

Occasionally, I see the movie "The Shop Around the Corner" listed among other holiday movies, especially on streaming apps. But it's not a holiday movie on the same level as more common classic holiday movies like "It's a Wonderful Life" even though both this and "It's a Wonderful Life" stars James Stewart. 

The story takes place in a small leathergoods store in Budapest. The owner, Hugo Matuschek (Frank Morgan) has a loyal staff which includes family man Pirovitch (Felix Bressart), the womanizing Ferencz Vadas (Joseph Schildkraut), saleswoman Ilona Novotny (Inez Courtney), clerk Flora Kaczek (Sara Haden) and the delivery boy Pepi Katona (William Tracy). 

Alfred Kralik (James Stewart) is perhaps his most loyal employee. He's been employed at Matuschek's shop the longest. 

Kralik has been corresponding anonymously with a lady whom he met through a newspaper advert. She's an intelligent woman, but the two haven't officially met. 

Meanwhile, tension has been slowly building suddenly between Kralik and Matuschek. It begins to boil over when Matuschek asks Kralik his opinion about selling a cigarette music box that plays "Ochi Chërnye" when it's opened. 

Matuschek thinks it'll be a popular item, but Kralik thinks it won't sell. 

After their disagreement, Klara Novak (Margaret Sullavan) walks in and approaches Kralik about a job. 

Kralik says there are no openings, and that Matuschek isn't looking for any new employees.

But when she manages on selling one of the cigarette boxes, Matuschek hires her on the spot. 

Meanwhile, Matuschek suspects his wife is having an affair. She's often out late at night and frequently requests money from him. 

Margaret Sullavan and James Stewart in "The Shop Around the Corner."

With Christmas on its way, Kralik and his mystery lady correspondent plan on officially meeting for the first time. 

They agree to have dinner together at a local restaurant. Unfortunately, the date is stalled when Matuschek requests all his employees stay late to help decorate the shop for Christmas. 

Later that night, he fires Kralik despite being his years of loyalty. 

This leaves the rest of the employees completely baffled. They don't know that Kralik's firing is based on Matuschek's suspicion that Kralik is fooling around with his wife, which of course isn't the case. 

When Matuschek meets up with a private investigator whom he hired to follow his wife, the investigator says he saw his wife with his other employee, Ferencz Vadas. 

Pepi comes back to the shop after hours just in the nick of time as he stops Matuschek from killing himself. 

Kralik, meanwhile, heads to the restaurant to meet his date, only to find his mystery girl is Novak. 

The realization is a letdown for him, but he decides to join her anyways under the ruse that he's there to meet up with Pirovitch. He doesn't let on that he's the mystery penpal. 

However, Novak thinks if her mystery writer sees her with Kralik, it'll ruin everything. She snaps at him, in fact, and calls him a "little insignificant clerk" before asking him to scram.
So, he scrams and makes his way to visit Matuschek who's in the hospital after his attempted suicide.
Matuschek is remorseful how he treated Kralik, apologizes, and offers him the manager position. Matuschek is also grateful to Pepi and offers him the clerk position. 

But Novak is left crestfallen as her mystery man, so she thinks, never showed up for their meeting/ date. So much so, she calls in sick to work the next day. 

Kralik pays her a visit that night after work, during which time she receives a letter from her mystery man. She even reads it to Kralik, unaware he's the guy who penned it. 

Christmas Eve rolls around, and the company holds their customary Christmas party. And that's when the beans spill. 

If the premise sounds familiar, "The Shop Around the Corner" has seen a few remakes, including the 1998 movie "You've Got Mail" with Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan. 

It also has the same storyline as the musical "In the Good Old Summertime" (1949) starring Judy Garland and Van Johnson. 

"The Shop Around the Corner" isn't necessarily an obscure movie, but when it comes to standard holiday movies, it's not as spoken of as other more movies stapled to Christmas. 

As for the label "Christmas movie," it's a real stretch of holiday logic to call this a Christmas movie. Personally, I think the same is true for the aforementioned "It's a Wonderful Life." In both movies, Christmas shows up sometime around the end. Perhaps it's debatable whether or not the holiday is an integral part of the story. 

As far as I'm concerned, I think the answer to what makes a film a "Christmas movie" is pretty basic. For a movie to be a Christmas movie, the holiday itself needs to support the plot. In other words, the plot is dependent upon Christmas. It's not enough for a movie to convey all those cheery Christmassy feels audiences love to wrap themselves up in around the holidays, though Christmas doesn't support the storyline. Still, people have their favorite flicks to watch around the holidays. And some of those movies happen to take place at Christmas. For a lot of people, that's all that's needed. 

Then again, the resolution seems to depend on Christmas. The reveal takes place on Christmas which adds to the charm and gives a little extra happiness to the already happy ending. Finding love may be the best Christmas gift for these characters. 

It also makes the sadness of the owner's loneliness sting a little bit more. 

There's a bit of heavy drama with Matuschek crushed at his wife cheating on him while thinking she's messing around with Kralik whom he otherwise has much appreciation and loyalty. That certainly pulls at the audience's emotions a lot more, especially as they watch his pain really eat him up. 

For a romantic comedy, the romance falls ever so gracefully and perfectly into place. The audience knows what's going to happen. Still, they want to see it blossom. The experience they're in for is Klara's reaction at the end. 

The problem with both Margaret Sullavan's and Jimmy Stewart's respective characters is that they're too in love with the prospect of being in love. And each one yucks the other's yum so to say. Only when they get over themselves, then the happy ending (or happy beginning) starts. 

Don't fast forward this one: My 'Superman' trailer reaction

I've been pretty tired of comic book movies in the last few years, primarily because of the flood of Marvel movies that have been released. The more recent movies failed pretty hard - i.e. "Madame Web," "The Marvels," and "Dark Phoenix" for instance. I certainly wasn't eager to see those. "Captain Marvel" from 2019 was also just plain terrible. 

When it comes to DC movies, well, I've been a little more partial to them probably because I was more familiar with DC superheroes in my youth. They've stuck with me. 

This upcoming and highly anticipated "Superman" movie, scheduled for release in July of 2025 is directed by James Gunn who also directed my most favorite Marvel movies, "Guardians of the Galaxy" Vol.1 and 2. So, "Superman" has my attention. I also shared my thoughts on "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3" on an earlier post.

With the movies DC Comics has released in the last 10 years, there have been a respectable number of hits.  

I thoroughly enjoyed director Zack Snyder's cut of "Justice League" - all four hours of it. I gave it a positive review for a column I used to write in a local newspaper. 

The 2023 movie "The Flash" was enjoyable enough for me, primarily because I wanted to see Michael Keaton in his 1989 Batman outfit one more time. And it gave me what I wanted! I walked away satisfied seeing Keaton as Batman one more time. Anyone who read my comments on Tim Burton's 1989 movie "Batman" may remember I have a special place in my heart for "Batman."  

I've become not-so-hateful towards 2016's "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice." It has grown on me, and I want to watch it again. 

I enjoyed 2017's "Wonder Woman" though its 2020 sequel "Wonder Woman 1984" was disappointing. Lastly, the 2019 DC movie "Shazam!" was surprisingly very enjoyable! It's 2023 sequel, "Shazam! Fury of the Gods" was a big miss in my book despite a few good things it had going for it.  

Otherwise, I've lost most of my interest in the stuff Marvel has been coming out with. The best days of Marvel's Cinematic Universe (MCU) is past. The fatigue is real. With DC seemingly not making as much of a desperate attempt to keep up with the MCU and just doing its own thing on its own time, I'm more excited to see what they come up with as far as movies go. And this trailer grabbed my attention like it did with millions of other movie-goers. 

Superman is the most American superhero out there. That attribute needs to shine through in this movie, especially with our social climate being what it is. That patriotic mentality certainly helped make 2022's "Top Gun" sequel "Top Gun: Maverick" one of the best movie sequels ever made. That movie is fantastic!

I think Superman needs to maintain his stance for "truth, justice, and the American way" in this upcoming flick. Ten years ago, to think otherwise of Superman would seem far-fetched. But that was ten years ago.

The trailer starts with Superman crash landing in a frozen wasteland, beaten severely thus creating a sense of urgency. What or whom could possibly beat up Superman so badly? Doomsday is my only guess. 

Anyways, pumping "Superman" with the all-too-commonplace woke ideology and anti-American sentiment and shame is my biggest concern for where this movie might go. The 2022 movie "The Batman" with Robert Pattinson leaned a bit in that direction as I recall, leaving a bad taste in my mouth. Even folks who don't read comic books can still get behind Superman, especially as a figure of Americana.

Otherwise, based on this trailer, "Superman" looks like it'll be a fun and enjoyable movie. Superman looks like Superman. It has all the appearances of what a Superman movie ought to be. In other words, it looks like it'll meet expectations! That's my prediction.

David Corenswet as Superman in the upcoming movie, "Superman."

I think my opinion is pretty much the same as that of most people from what I've seen online. 

David Corenswet is cast as Superman alongside Nathan Fillion as Guy Gardner (Green Lantern), Rachel Brosnahan as Lois Lane, Isabela Merced as Hawkgirl and Nicholas Hoult as Lex Luthor. Seeing Krypto, too, is a welcomed move for producers to include. No doubt Krypto will bring the movie plenty of marketing opportunities. After all, Krypto proved to be popular in "League of Super Pets" (2022). 
Corenswet was recently in the successful movie "Twisters" - a sequel to the 1996 "Twister." And Brosnahan had a successful run on "House of Cards." 

Hoult certainly isn't a bad actor. I enjoyed his performance in the 2019 movie "Tolkien" in which he played the lead role of "Lord of the Rings" author J.R.R. Tolkien. I also enjoyed his performance in the 2022 comedy horror movie, "The Menu." 

So, all in all, I think the cast in this new "Superman" is pretty solid. 

Like everyone else, no doubt, I'm anxious to see where this movie fits in. Is it a reboot, or does it have a place within the rest of the recent DC movies? If it's a reboot, I'm ok with that. 

As classic and foundational a film it is, I think the 1978 movie "Superman" with the late, great Christopher Reeve, has a mediocre storyline. "Superman II" is a much better film. In fact, it's one of my favorite all-time superhero movies. "Superman III" is...umm...well, it has Richard Pryor! And "Superman IV: The Quest for Peace" is a tired and feeble snore-fest. 

I also thought 2006's "Superman Returns" was sorely lacking though Brandon Routh as Superman was a good casting choice. I saw "Man of Steel" (2013) upon its release, and don't remember much about it. I guess I ought to check it out again. 

So, I'm o.k. with a reboot. Regardless of what kind of movie "Superman" turns out to be (reboot or continuation), from the looks of this teaser trailer, it leans heavily towards the possibility of being a well-made and worthwhile flick. It certainly packs a lot in for a movie simply called "Superman." I can't wait to see it. 

It Happened on 5th Avenue (1947)

"There are richer men than I." 

Director
Roy Del Ruth

Cast
Don DeFore - Jim Bullock
Gale Storm - Trudy O'Connor
Victor Moore - Aloyisius T. McKeever
Charlie Ruggles - Michael J. O'Connor
Ann Harding - Mary O'Connor
Grant Mitchell - Farrow
Edward Brophy - Patrolman Cecil Felton
Arthur Hohl - Patrolman Brady (uncredited)
Alan Hale, Jr. - Whitey Temple
Dorothea Kent - Margie Temple

I found this movie fascinating, to be honest.

First, if you ask me, or even if you didn't ask me, as I previously mentioned, I think a Christmas movie needs to use Christmas as an integral part of the story in some way or another if it's going to claim the status of "Christmas movie." 

If a part of the movie happens to take place at Christmas, but it doesn't play any necessary role outside of setting, then it's questionable to me if it's truly a Christmas movie or not. Still, some audiences claim certain movies to be "Christmas movies" and make it a point to catch that movie every Holiday season simply because the story takes place, even partially, at Christmas. I'm certainly not criticizing them nor the movies they love to watch around the holidays. If that's all it takes for them, then enjoy, and merry Christmas.  

Meanwhile, some Christmas movies haven't quite reached the zenith that other Christmas movies reach every single year, with no sign of fading. 

"It Happened on 5th Avenue" is one such movie. 

I'm sure there's a lot of people out there that likely catch this movie every December. But does this play just as much as "It's a Wonderful Life" or any version of "A Christmas Carol" on television? 

So, what exactly happened of 5th Avenue? 

The movie starts with a homeless guy named Aloysius T. McKeever (Victor Moore) as he takes up habitation (or "squatting" as we call it today) in a huge 5th Avenue estate which the owner boards up at the same time each year. That owner happens to be Michael J. O'Connor, (Charlie Ruggles). He's the second richest man in the world. During the winter season, O'Connor heads to his property somewhere in Virginia where it's warmer, leaving his 5th Avenue mansion vacant. 

So, McKeever takes advantage of the opportunity each year to live like the other half live, and stay in luxurious warmth, too. Wintertime in New York, I hear, can be painfully frigid. 

This time, McKeever takes in an ex-G.I. named Jim Bullock (Don DeFore) who was evicted from his apartment building which the same O'Connor happens to own and is tearing down in order to build a skyscraper. 

With a housing crisis hindering veterans from finding homes, Jim invites fellow vets Whitey Temple (Alan Hale, Jr.), Hank (Edward Ryan) and their families to stay at the mansion.

Meanwhile, O'Connor's runaway daughter, Trudy, who doesn't initially admit she's his 18-year-old daughter, shows up at the house.  

She and Jim end up falling in love. Trudy just doesn't want Jim to know that she is Michael's daughter as she doesn't want Jim to love her back for her family wealth. 

Trudy showed up initially because she has been increasingly unhappy that her parents are divorced. So much so that she ran away from her school and returned to the house to grab some of her clothes. 

Her parents divorced after her mother felt Michael was more interested in pursuing wealth than maintaining his love and affection for his wife. All the while, she wishes her parents would get back together.

As her feelings for Jim grow, she wants to marry him. It so happens that her dad had to return to New York from Virginia because of some business that needed his attention. 

So, she asks her dad to come by the house. However, she asks that he disguise himself as a vagrant looking for shelter and that he calls himself "Mike." 

This is where the comedy shines through. Mike has to be a guest in his own home with a bunch of squatters. 

McKeever allows him to stay but he treats Mike like a servant. 

Of course, this unwelcomed and sudden lifestyle wears thin really fast. Mike demands Trudy get all of the riff-raff out of his house in 24-hours. 

This makes Trudy really upset. So, she calls her mom, Mary (Ann Harding) down in Florida for some help. 

Even though she and Michael are divorced, Mary still comes to her daughter's rescue. 

When she arrives at the house, Mary also pretends to be homeless. 

Within no time, McKeever senses that Mary and Mike kind of like each other. Of course, he's still completely unaware of who they are, and gives them both little pushes towards each other. 

These efforts work as Mike tells Mary that he's changed over the years and proposes to her which Mary accepts. I can get behind that message regarding marriage. 

As this crew of squatters begin celebrating Christmas, with the homeowner among them, but not making his true identity known, two police officers catch them all inside the house. 

However, McKeever persuades the cops to allow them to stay until the new year as it's cold outside. And kicking them out of the warmth of the house during this time of the year wouldn't be right. 

Mike's true identity is eventually revealed to everyone, but not before correcting some wrongs and becoming more empathetic on his part towards those less fortunate than he. 

The inhabitants enjoy a wonderful New Year's dinner, after which they leave the house in the condition, they found it in. 

This story feels like a more true-to-life tale of Ebeneezer Scrooge minus the supernatural elements, and haughty Scrooge. O'Connor isn't necessarily a Christmas-hating old miser. In fact, he's a reasonable guy with no chip on his shoulder. Christmas has much less to do with the overall tale than it does in "A Christmas Carol." Still, it plays a role in softening the hearts of some who may not have realized their hearts needed softening. It plays a role in igniting a sense of correcting personal wrongs, which O'Connor accomplishes for the sake of his family. And it strengthens a sense of empathy. The general premise of charity, mercy, forgiveness and redemption plays just as much of an important part in the story as it does in "A Christmas Carol." The themes in this movie surround class. status, wealth, and forming friendships. 

I'm sure "It Happened on 5th Avenue" has its share of returning admirers who watch this every year in December. 

The story feels much more Hollywood-esque than other Christmas movies. 

Its humor is a bit heavier with sugary sweetness, though the meaningful morals are there. 

The movie serves its purpose in that it makes the audience feel enough warm for the holiday season.

The Lemon Drop Kid (1951)

"Silver Bells. Silver Bells. Let's put some dough in the kitty. Chuck it in, Chuck it in, or Sandy will give you a mickey."

Director
Sidney Lanfield

Cast
Bob Hope - The Lemon Drop Kid
Marilyn Maxwell - Brainy Baxter
Lloyd Nolan - Oxford Charlie
Jane Darwell - Nellie Thursday
Andrea King - Stella
Fred Clark - Moose Moran
Jay C. Flippen - Straight Flush Tony
William Frawley - Gloomy Willie
Harry Bellaver - Sam the Surgeon
Sid Melton - Little Louie

I had the Christmas movie, "The Lemon Drop Kid" in my sights since Christmas 2023 when I commented on the other underrated holiday classics I've posted, or have yet to post, this month. 

I meant to watch it with my wife last year but didn't. So, I happened to catch it with her a week ago on the streaming app, "Classic Comedy Channel." 

Looking at the movie poster to "The Lemon Drop Kid" it doesn't look like a Christmas movie, but it is. In fact, for those that don't know, "The Lemon Drop Kid" gave the world the well-known Christmas carol, "Silver Bells" that's still sung and heard among the vast catalog of other Christmas carols sung and heard to this day. 

I find those small informative tidbits of holiday history amusing. You know, like how the movie "Meet Me in St. Louis" gave us "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas" or that “Baby, It’s Cold Outside” was popularized thanks to the movie "Neptune’s Daughter" from 1949. It's a fantastic song, by the way. It's certainly more wholesome than that loathsome "song" Cardi B vomited out a couple years back while the woke scolds wagged their finger at "Baby, It's Cold Outside." But on that topic, I really can't stay.

In this movie, Bob Hope plays "the Lemon Drop Kid" who's called that because he habitually eats lemon drops while coning people around New York, especially at the racetrack.

That's where the movie opens. The kid is swindling people at a racetrack by claiming to have inside information on the horses.

One of his hits is a young woman trying to place a $2,000 bet on a horse named Iron Bar. He manages to trick her into betting on another horse. However, he doesn't know this girl is dating one of New York's notorious mobsters, 'Moose' Moran (Fred Clark) who's with her at the track.

The horse she bet on comes in last. And Moran sends some goons out to grab the kid and bring him back to his place for...talking to. 

He demands the kid pay him the $10,0000 he would have won as Iron Horse came in first.

Bob Hope and Marilyn Maxwell in "The Lemon Drop Kid."

Or it's curtains for the kid, and just in time for Christmas, too. The kid may not make it into the new year unless he comes up with the dough.

Christmas is on its way, and the kid is desperate to come up with the cash. 

He goes to his kind-of girlfriend, Brainey Baxter (Marilyn Maxwell) to see if he can milk some cash off of her. When she brings up his lack of long-term commitment in their relationship, he takes a powder.
The kid then pays a visit to another crime boss, Oxford Charlie (Lloyd Nolan) for some help. 

Charlie has his own financial troubles with zero interest in helping the kid. Strike two!

Meandering the New York streets, the kid spots a Santa Claus ringing his bell for donations. This gives the kid an idea. He dresses as Santa and starts panhandling for donations...for himself, of course. 

A cop recognizes him, shuts down his little operation, and takes him in. 

After appearing in court, and landing in the pokey, Brainy bails him out. 

The kid comes up with a master scheme by coming up with a fake charitable organization and obtaining a city permit to organize his fraudulent charity. 

He sets it up for his sweet old neighbor, Nellie Thursday (Jane Darwell) who has been denied entry into a retirement home because her husband has been to jail. 

The kid goes to some of his con-artist buddies around New York for help, as well as Brainey, who thinks he has turned over a new and more kind-hearted leaf.

Together, they turn an old, abandoned casino into the "Nellie Thursday Home for Old Dolls"

With that, a collection of old ladies moves in, and all the necessary accommodations are made using makeshift items such as roulette tables as beds and so on. The city therefore grants the kid his much-needed license. 

Now, he and his pals can dress up as Saint Nick, and go out there with their own bells and buckets to collect donations all around Manhattan without being hassled by the fuzz. Of course, the kid failed to inform Santa's helpers that he really intends to use the money they collect to pay Moran his $10.000. 

The donations add up fast and plentiful. Kid's con is working. 

This impresses Brainey so much that she quits her job and starts working full time at the Nellie Thursday Home. 

Oxford Charlie gets in on the scheme thanks to Brainy. He thinks whichever home Nellie Thursday resides in can also be considered one of "Nellie Thursday's Home for Old Dolls." 

He has his muscle kidnap all the old ladies and move them into a large estate mansion in Nyack so he can reap some cash benefits. 

The kid returns home soon after to find the old casino empty and all the money collected from the panhandling, which he hid inside a hollowed-out statue, gone. 

He indulges in his self-pity while his helpers, as well as Brainy, learn what the kid's scheme really was. 

The kid soon figures out Oxford Charlie is behind this major setback. So, he goes to his office to steal the money back. And, maybe, he really does turn over a new, and much less self-centered, leaf.

Bob Hope is natural at bringing in some warmth to the story, but seeing as how the story is about a con artist, too much warmth would feel out of place. 

This movie doesn't overdo it. It's a different sort of redemptive story. I'm mentally comparing it to Scrooge's story from "A Christmas Carol." It's a story of a good-hearted guy making bad decisions. And Christmas is there to show that its never too late to start doing the right thing while casting off our bad habits, no matter how deep they run. It may be hard but it's not impossible. The kid doesn't need ghosts to get to where he needs to be. But a little fear, and seeing the problems of others, certainly pushes him

Christmas movies generally aim at sprinkling its audience with all those holiday movie feels. "The Lemon Drop Kid" is different in that sense for a Christmas movie. 

Hope puts in just enough and fills the rest in with his typical Bob Hope one-liners. I think that's what distinguishes this movie, which is a comedy, from something like "The Shop Around the Corner" and "It's a Wonderful Life." 

I think the term "timeless" doesn't apply as well as it could to "The Lemon Drop Kid" as it does to the other movies I've posted, or will post. A lot of that has to do with Bob Hope's period jokes. For instance, in one scene Hope jokingly refers to a cow as "Crosby." In another scene, when that same cow shows up at the home, and someone asks what it's doing there, he replies that Milton Berle is on tonight. They're period jokes and typical Bob Hope one-liners. They'll go over the heads of audiences who aren't up on their classic comedy.

Today this movie would likely appeal more to aficionados of old movies rather than audiences looking for something warm, relatable, and Christmassy to watch around the holidays, although it does have some of that.

The humor is very much a product of its time. That's not to say the movie isn't funny. 

It's wonderfully different for a Christmas movie; and it truly is a Christmas movie. That is, not only does the movie take place at Christmas, but the holiday season plays a critical role in the plot. This story, based on a short story by Damon Runyon, was previously depicted in the 1934 movie, "The Lemon Drop Kid" starring Lee Tracy and Helen Mack.

I found the 1951 movie streaming on the classic comedy streaming app. And to my absolute disgust, they cut out the song "Silver Bells" completely.  

Cutting the musical number out is uncalled for and hugely disappointing. It's shameful and unnecessary. Shame on you, app. SHAME ON YOU! 

Otherwise, it's a fun, innocent period comedy that's certainly different from the "home for the holidays" style of Christmas classic, although it has its own unique version of that style that fits the respective story.

A Christmas Story Christmas (2022)

My review of "A Christmas Story Christmas" originally published in the "Junction City Union" back in 2022. I reposted it here because it's not available online anymore. I made a few slight corrections from the original review, and added some imagery. Cheers! 

'A Christmas Story' sequel captures writer Jean Shepherd's irony and humor

Mike Sellman 

3.5 out of 4 stars

I believe I'm among a large audience who hasn't let a Christmas season go by without watching the 1983 holiday comedy, "A Christmas Story" at least once. I've been doing it for approximately the last 35 years. It seems like a movie people either love or dislike, the latter slandering the film with comments about it being "too silly" or "largely overrated." Regardless, I still make it a point to watch it every holiday season.

Never did I think I would see the actors from "A Christmas Story" return to their roles for a follow-up film. 

But they did in the sequel, "A Christmas Story Christmas," released Nov. 17, 2022 on HBO Max. 

The original movie, "A Christmas Story," directed by Bob Clark and released in 1983, is based on the books, "In God We Trust: All Others Pay Cash" and "Wanda Hickey's Night of Golden Memories and Other Disasters" by humor writer Jean Shepherd who passed away in 1999. It's also narrated by Shepherd who makes a cameo. Look for him. He's in there. 

Set in fictional Hohman, Ind. in the 1940s, the comedy holiday movie tells the story of young Ralphie Parker (played by Peter Billingsly) and his quest for a Red Ryder BB gun for Christmas. 

Billingsly is back playing Ralphie after nearly 40 years in this sequel. 

This continuing story takes place in 1973 - 33 years after young Ralphie got his BB gun.

Ralphie, now a struggling writer, lives in Chicago with his wife, Sandy (Erinn Hayes), their son Mark (River Drosche) and youngest child, Julie (Julianna Layne). 

He has taken a year off to write his first novel. He's been trying to have his manuscript published, only to be turned down by publisher after publisher. 

In the midst of this struggle, and as Christmas approaches, Ralphie gets a call from his mother (Julie Hagerty) with some tragic news. His father, (played in the original film by Darren McGavin) has died. 

Grieving, Ralphie's family heads to his childhood home in Hohman to be with his mother. 

When they arrive, Mrs. Parker asks Ralphie to write his father's obituary. On top of that, despite the tragic loss of his "old man," she wants him to take up the task of making Christmas wonderful for the family in memory of his dad who had a great affinity for the holiday season.

Of course, in the midst of Ralphie reacquainting with his old friends at the local bar owned by his childhood buddy Flick, played again by Scott Schwartz, and getting ready to celebrate Christmas, small yet unthinkable disasters descend upon him and his plans. 

Jean Shepherd is one of the best satirical story tellers in American story telling history. His stories amazingly depict the fondly remembered yesteryear of Americana with all its imperfections and disappointments, all with charming relatability.  

Peter Billingsly as 'Ralph Parker' in "A Christmas Story Christmas."

Whether reading his words, or listening to his old radio programs, the nostalgic Americana flows naturally from his mind. He's the Norman Rockwell of the written word. 

Shepherd's work doesn't mock. He just sees through the glisten of America's bygone "golden" era. 

No matter how wonderful, warm and memorable the American yesteryear is, Shepherd doesn't fail to point out the vexations, great and small, that came with day-to-day life of the 1940s on. This wit comes through enjoyable well and clear in "A Christmas Story Christmas." 

It's an element that makes the original movie well loved. 

While the movie is certainly a tribute to actor Darren McGavin, it also pays a great amount of tribute to Shepherd. That doesn't surprise me as his children, Randall and Adrian Shepherd, are co-producers of "A Christmas Story Christmas."

In the movie, Ralphie sets up his writing space up in the attic of his boyhood home on Cleveland Street. 

He finds his old typewriter and sets it up. The scenario works as a means to call back old memories seen in the first movie.

Of course, now those "memories" are covered in dust and cobwebs. Thankfully, these call-backs aren't overplayed with gushy nostalgic sentimentalities. 

Rather, the first movie is called back to memory here and there, from time to time, through props, jokes, or similar shots as seen in the part one. 

Yet, it doesn't completely depend on part one to tell a new and just-as-relatable story. 

Though the first movie doesn't end on any kind of cliffhanger. the new movie manages to say something meaningful. 

Some of the jokes and references are updated. Ralphie's daydreams for instance, as seen in part one, is a habit continues into his adult years.

One such fantasy Ralphie has is of himself winning the Pulitzer Prize. He has this fantasy while in the office of a publisher who's rejecting his work. 

What writer hasn't fantasized about their work winning a Pulitzer amidst a standing ovation?

A few scenes were recreated from the first film, such as the escalator ride up to see Santa Claus in Higbee's Department Store.

Other scenes are updated, such as Ralphie bribing a potential publisher with Christmas candy. a habit he practiced when trying to score a good grade on his writing assignment from his schoolteacher, Miss. Shields, in the first film. 

Such callbacks are mere fan service rather than depending on the humor and scenes from part one. Other parts in the film feel like a Hallmark Holiday movie with its Christmas sentimentality. 

Still, new jokes are written in, such as a running gag with wives constantly calling Flick's Tavern looking for their husbands. When the phone rings, the entire bar goes quiet. This is the kind of humor Shepherd is known for.

As "A Christmas Story" didn't perform well at the box office upon its release, making a sequel comes across as a big gamble. But it has been tried several times before. 

Once Turner Network Television (TNT) started running its 24-hour marathon of "A Christmas Story" around Christmas beginning in the late 1990s, the movie's modest and low-profile quality quickly drowned in the saturation of commercialism and merchandise seen today that likely led to this very sequel. Funny how that works as the original satirizes the commercialism of Christmas. 

"A Christmas Story" is not the first adaptation of Shepherd's works about Ralphie and his family. 

A television film based on based on Shepherd's stories about Ralphie, called "Phantom of the Open Hearth," aired on the PBS anthology series "Visions" in 1976.

In 1982, another television film, called "The Great American Fourth of July and Other Disasters" aired on another PBS series, "American Playhouse." It stars a young Matt Dillon as Ralph. 

In 1985, "The Star-Crossed Romance of Josephine Cosnowski" also aired on "American Playhouse." Since it was released two years after "A Christmas Story," some might argue that this is the first sequel (technically) to "A Christmas Story" though the movie doesn't make any reference to the film. 

In 1988, the movie "Ollie Hopnoodle's Haven of Bliss," starring Jerry O'Connell as Ralphie, and based on a short story by Shepherd published in "Playboy" magazine, aired on the Disney Channel. It later had a VHS release. 

"A Christmas Story" director Bob Clark teamed up with Shepherd a second time to make an official sequel called "It Runs in the Family." Released in theaters in 1994, the film stars Charles Grodin, Mary Steenburgen, and Kieran Culkin as Ralphie. It's also narrated by Shepherd just like the first movie. 

It picks up in the summer after the events of "A Christmas Story."

"It Runs in the Family" was released on DVD under the title, "My Summer Story." 

Unlike the titles I just mentioned, the 2012 straight-to-DVD movie, "A Christmas Story 2," debatably billed as the "official sequel," isn't based on any of Shepherd's writings. Rather, it pulls so much inspiration and content from the original movie, audiences might as well skip it and watch the first film. The less said about it, the better. 

Though "A Christmas Story Christmas" feels more like a film for the fans of the first movie, it certainly isn't a forgettable sequel. The effort and consideration to tell a continuing story to a movie that never needed a sequel to begin with is very present. 

It's not as original a sequel like "My Summer Story." Still, it manages to be distinct enough. 

The movie had me laughing at times just as hard as I do when watching part one. Its story is as empathetic as "A Christmas Story." It has the spirit of a quiet film despite all the commercialism attached to the franchise. The sequel does depend on the nostalgia, but the story works by itself.

Ralphie now working as a writer captures Shepherd's spirit. It also captures his humor and irony. This film maintains the agony of childhood like the first one did and mixes it with the pressures of adulthood. It ties it all together beautifully with its ending that is surely a meaningful bow not to the franchise, but to Shepherd, which I don't doubt he would be proud of. 

While I have you here. check out my other posts about films based on Jean Shepherd's stories about Ralphie 🎄

"Phantom of the Open Hearth" (1976)
"The Great American Fourth of July, and Other Disasters" (1982)

"A Christmas Story" (1983)
"The Star-Crossed Romance of Josephine Cosnowski" (1985)
"Ollie Hopnoodle's Haven of Bliss" (1988)
"It Runs in the Family" (1994)
"A Christmas Story 2" (2012)

The Holly and the Ivy (1952)

"I find all these Christmas decorations particularly depressing." 

Director
George More O'Ferrall

Cast
Ralph Richardson - Rev. Martin Gregory
Celia Johnson - Jenny Gregory
Margaret Leighton - Margaret Gregory
Denholm Elliott - Gunner Michael Gregory
John Gregson - David Paterson
Hugh Williams - Lt. Col. Richard Wyndham
Margaret Halstan - Aunt Lydia
Maureen Delany - Aunt Bridget

Going along the same train of thought mentioned in my last review, "Christmas in Connecticut," the 1952 British holiday drama "The Holly and the Ivy" is a Christmas movie that doesn't get the same attention as more popular holiday movies that are sentimentally and dutifully watched year after year. 

Unlike "Christmas in Connecticut," I found "The Holly and the Ivy" much more palatable and human, though it has a melancholier tone. 

The movie centers on an English minister, Rev. Martin Gregory (Ralph Richardson), whose family are coming from all around England to his home for Christmas as they do every year. Martin lives in the remote village of Wyndenham in Norfolk where he practices his ministry. He lives with his daughter, Jenny (Celia Johnson), and is up there in his age. He seems to be more concerned over his flock than his family. So much so that he doesn't realize how dysfunctional his family is.

Martin also has a daughter named Margaret (Margaret Leighton) and a son named Michael (Denholm Elliott). Also, their cousin Lt. Col. Richard Wyndham (Hugh Williams) as well as Jenny's boyfriend, David Paterson (John Gregson), and their Aunts Lydia (Margaret Halstan) and Bridget (Maureen Delany) are joining the Gregory family for the holidays. 

When the Gregory family is all together, tensions begin to build. 

To begin with, Michael is developing a disdain for religion. He's also upset with his father's plans to send him off to a university after Michael finished with his national service in the Royal Artillery.

When Margaret shows up, she tells Jenny that she doesn't plan to stay. She also goes on about not wanting to continue as a magazine writer in London. Jenny quickly concludes that Margaret has become an alcoholic. 

Margaret later reveals that she had a son out of wedlock four years ago. Unfortunately, her son died of meningitis and the grief drove her to alcohol. She has also become an atheist. Atheism has a tendency to spawn from painful and traumatic events. 

Underneath all their personal issues, each of these siblings share one common problem. They don't think they can approach their father about their respective problems. They figure he'll just show disapproval for their issues rather than be supportive and helpful. If only they realized that disapproval of stupid decisions can be a compassionate act. What they want is their father to lie and tell them they're all still good little girls and boys. 

Ralph Richardson and Margaret Leighton in 'The Holly and the Ivy.'

As they continue to assume their father's feelings and reactions, Michael and Margaret decide they need to leave the house for a while to get away from their dad and their aunts. So, they go to a movie on Christmas Eve. Afterwards, they go out to a pub and return home drunk. 

When Christmas morning arrives, Margaret announces she's leaving. 

Meanwhile, Michael and his dad have an argument which reaches a point were Michael questions God's existence. 

But their preconceived ideas of their father are wrong. In fact, he's dealt with issues like these among his flock. Plus, he's had his own unconventional obstacles since the time he realized his religious vocation. 

He has deep and open conversations separately with Michael and Margaret where he realizes that he made his own mistakes as a father. That is, he paid more attention helping the members of his flock than paying attention to his own family. Their expectations about how their father would react are wrong. Forgiveness from him, forgiving themselves is a step towards healing, though the feeling of shame isn't necessarily a bad thing. 

At the end, the entire family are joined together at church on Christmas morning where they should be. 

While "The Holly and the Ivy" elevates Christmas to the level of honor that the holiday deserves, it still reminds audiences that even though its generally a holy and jolly time, it can also be a time to settle issues especially among family members, continue loving and forgiving (if necessary) the faults of our loved ones, and work on correcting our faults more vigilantly. It's a wonderful time of the year while also being the time when God and sinners reconcile. It's never too late to do the right thing. 

Not only does this family have problems, but they do understand the importance of Christmas despite their bitterness. They don't gush over the holiday, but they still gather even if with some reluctance. They all share a desire for resolution and reconciliation. 

While the theme is family coming together at Christmas, mending old unhealed wounds is just as important for this sacred holiday. The movie is unique among Christmas stories. 

A portion of the story deals with values and differences between generations. This is depicted between Lydia, Bridget, and everyone else staying for Christmas. There's tension between the generations. 

There's a scene in which Jenny and Aunt Bridget have an exchange about having goose rather than turkey for Christmas day just before Bridget threatens to leave over Margaret and Michael coming home drunk the night before. 

"You'll miss the goose if you go out," Jenny says.

"Goose is it you're having? Not turkey," Bridget replies.

"Oh, dear. Don't you like goose?"

Denholm Elliott, John Gregson, and Celia Johnson.

"I do. I prefer it. Now, I don't know what to do."

"Then stay on, Bridget." 

The story is drier than what American audiences may be accustomed to, especially when it comes to Christmas movies. That is, there's no hugely dramatized sentimental Christmas moment like George Bailey running down Main Street in Bedford Falls wishing everyone one a Merry Christmas, or young Ralphie Parker getting that one gift he so desperately wanted. The movie is heavy with dialogue, which is probably due to it being based on a stage play by Wynyard Browne. He based his play on the dynamics of his own family. The movie certainly feels like a stage play. 

To its credit, "The Holly and the Ivy" was shot in sequence which gives the actors a chance to develop their emotions as the story progresses. It works amazingly well. 

The movie does have some great lines, especially a comment about engineers being inhuman! 

"It isn't petrol or oil that make the world go 'round." 

The carol that the movie is named for is one of my favorite carols. In the song, ivy symbolizes the Virgin Mary and the holly symbolizes Jesus Christ. While ivy is in the title, the song is really about the holly. There's a scene at the dinner table where the family discuss the meaning behind the lyrics to "The Holly and the Ivy."  
Each stanza of the song describes something beautiful alongside something unpleasant about holly. 

"The holly bears the blossom, as white as the lily flower."

"The holly bears a berry, as red as any blood."

"The holly bears a prickle, as sharp as any thorn."

"The holly bears a bark, as bitter as any gall."

I wouldn't have been able to come up with a better title for a story like this one if I worked at it for years. The story utilizes Christmas as the time of year when both pain and forgiveness are most intensely felt.

There's no other Christmas movie I've seen where this is so well depicted. Other movies would generally use this family dysfunction, with the patriarch being a pastor, for laughs. While it's a Christmas movie that might lack the spark that ignites the Christmas feels which audiences, especially American audiences, love about their traditional Christmas movies, "The Holly and the Ivy" is a movie that deserves more attention around the holiday season.    

Christmas in Connecticut (1945)

"Everything is hunky-dunky!"

Director

Peter Godfrey

Cast
Barbara Stanwyck - Elizabeth Lane
Dennis Morgan - Jefferson Jones
Sydney Greenstreet - Alexander Yardley
Reginald Gardiner - John Sloan
S.Z. Sakall - Felix Bassenak
Robert Shayne - Dudley Beecham
Una O'Connor - Norah
Frank Jenks - Sinkewicz
Joyce Compton - Mary Lee
Dick Elliott - Judge Crothers

Last Christmas season (2023) my wife and I sat down to some not-so-traditionally nor highly customary Christmas movies. We picked four movies that aren't as widely appreciated and commercialized as, say, "National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation," or "A Christmas Story," or "Elf" or "It's a Wonderful Life," or any version of "A Christmas Carol." You won't find these Christmas movies emblazoned on t-shirts, winter pajama pants, talking tree ornaments or novelty candies.

I had the idea to review a handful of holiday movies that don't quite get the accolades and appreciation of more customary Christmas movies like those I mentioned. I meant to post them last Christmas, but I didn't. So, I saved them for this year. It's like I packed them away with the rest of the decorations down in the basement. And now with the holidays upon us, I'm digging them back out, blowing the dust off, and displaying them.

Each year at Christmas, audiences often watch the same old Christmas movies which we hear about again and again.

Most of these are great movies, particularly "A Christmas Story" and "It's a Wonderful Life" which are the two greatest holiday movies ever filmed. 

I wanted to give some not-so-talked about movies a chance.

In the 1945 movie, "Christmas in Connecticut," Barbara Stanwyck plays Elizabeth Lane, a food writer out of New York. 

Lane writes columns about her husband and baby living out on a Connecticut farm. She certainly has her fanbase. But the content is all completely made up. 

Her readers don't know that. Her publisher, Alexander Yardley (Sydney Greenstreet), doesn't even realize it's all fake. Rather, he wants Lane to host a special Christmas dinner that goes along with the atmosphere of her column for one of her readers - war hero Jefferson Jones (Dennis Morgan). 

While he was in the hospital, Jones read all her columns and recipes and was really impressed by them. So much so that his nurse and fiancé, Mary Lee (Joyce Compton), penned a letter to Yardley. 

Well, now Lane is caught between either admitting the truth and ruining both her career and that of Yardley's as well as her editor, Dudley Beecham's (Robert Shayne). Or she can go along with this plan as best she can. She doesn't know how to cook well, and she doesn't have any children. 

Lane decides to go along with the plan and wing it along the way. 

She asks her "honorary uncle" and chef, Felix Bassenak (S.Z. Sakall) for help as he's been supplying her with recipes for her column. 

Her first dilemma is finding a farm in Connecticut. Luckily, her friend John Sloan (Reginald Gardiner) happens to have one. He has the hots for Lane so he's fine loaning his property to her. But he insists she marry him in return. In desperation to borrow his farm to carry out this lie of hers, she agrees.  

Next, she needs a baby as she doesn't have one. 

Luckily, the neighbor has a baby which she "borrows" to pass off as her own. However, she has little to no experience with babies. So, there's that issue. 

She also wants to marry John right away. She asks Judge Crothers (Dick Elliott) to marry them right there in the farmhouse. 

But when Jefferson arrives early, causing the ceremony to be delayed, something happens that Lane wasn't anticipating. She falls in love with him. 

Barbara Stanwyck and Dennis Morgan in "Christmas in Connecticut."

With all this going on, it's up to Lane to keep this charade going through Christmas. 

Honestly, as comedic as the scenario is, I can see why this movie isn't elevated to the same appreciation and level of the more widely popular Christmas movies.

The premise lacks charm, relatability, and Christmas spirit. 
Stanwyck's character is heaping one lie on top of another, until she simply can't anymore. And she puts her reputation, as well as that of others, on the line. And the audience is expected to like her in the end. 

Then, when things start to turn on her, Lane lashes out at Yardley. 
"I'm tired of being pushed around," she says when he won't let her speak. "Tired of being told what to do. Tired of writing your god-darned articles. Tired of dancing to everybody else's tune. Tired of being told whom to marry. In short, I'm tired!"

I certainly don't feel any sympathy for her. What a joke! 

And to really drive home the fact that Lane is completely selfish, she lashes out at Jefferson for "deceiving her." 
"Don't you come near me, you seawolf, after the way you deceived me," she says. 

"I deceived you?" he says.
"Yes! You're engaged!"

"You're married," he replies.
"That has nothing to do with it!"

Lane is unlikeable, plain and simple. If that's what Stanwyk was going for in her performance, then she nailed it beautifully. Her performance is strong and, all things considered, entertaining and well-performed. The fact this movie takes place at Christmas, as if to say "even assholes can have a Christmas miracle" is void of anything likeable. 

The whole movie plays out like a long early sitcom Christmas special a la "I Love Lucy" or maybe "The Honeymooners." If only Jackie Gleason took the lead role. 

 To its credit, I did stay focused until the end because I needed to see how this whole situation would wrap up. 

With this kind of comedy, I can understand why some might enjoy this movie around the holidays. Not me, though. It leaves a nasty taste in my mouth. 

I can't help but compare this flick to the more iconic, and far superior movie, "It's a Wonderful Life" (with all respect to Frank Capra's fantastic film) which only takes place at Christmas time in the final act of the movie. Part of the charm of the movie is getting to the Christmas portion of the story. 

"Christmas in Connecticut" tries to be charming by appealing heavily on sentiments and the cute appearance of devilish dishonesty disguised as innocence though the main character is anything but innocent.

One good thing did come out of this experience. Next time someone tells me "A Christmas Story" is a stupid movie, I'll direct them to "Christmas is Connecticut."  

The All New Adventures of Laurel & Hardy: For Love or Mummy (1999)

"Come on, Stanley. We gotta put a mummy in a box!"

Directors

John R. Cherry III
Larry Harmon

Cast
Bronson Pinchot - Stan
Gailard Sartain - Ollie
F. Murray Abraham - Prof. Henry Covington
Philip Godawa - Farouk Bin Abdullah
Susan Danford - Leslie Covington
Jeffrey Pillars - Barney the biker
Rick Rogers - Lt. Kowalski
Farouk Valley - Omar as Habib

There's been a lot of horror for me this October. Too much of anything isn't normally good. So, I'm veering towards something more lighthearted. 

And the movie, "The All New Adventures of Laurel & Hardy: For Love or Mummy " is something I've had on my radar since watching the 2018 biopic, "Stan and Ollie" with Steve Coogan and John C. Reilly. I was too curious to see how a reboot would depict and treat Laurel and Hardy.  

Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy aren't a comedic duo that can be rebooted and plopped into current time. But that's what this reboot tries to do. Though slapstick comedy, even Laurel and Hardy's style of slapstick, might be able to work in a modern setting. As for the characters of Laurel and Hardy, it doesn't work. It doesn't even kind of work. They're a product of their time. And they're best loved and appreciated in their respective era. The fact that the title is "The All New Adventures of..." seems to indicate that this was meant to be the first adventure film to be followed by other all new adventures. Thankfully, that didn't happen. 

In this movie, Stan Thinnius Laurel (Bronson Pinchot) and Oliver Fattius Hardy (Gailard Sartain) are somehow related to the OG Laurel and Hardy. I had to Google that detail and found they're the great-grand nephews of Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy. If it's mentioned in the movie, I must have missed it. 

Anyways, the film takes place in Florida as Stan and Ollie assist with an Egyptian exhibit which includes rare artifacts curated by Prof. Henry Covington (F. Murray Abraham). 

One of these rare artifacts is the mummified corpse of Hootah. 

Little does Covington know that an Egyptian cult is holding rituals to bring the mummy back to life. And the cult leader wants to make Convington's daughter, Leslie (Susan Danford) the bride of the mummy. 

Ollie, by the way, has the hots for Leslie. Anyways, the mummy is brought to life, scares everyone, and wreaks havoc. Stan and Ollie fumble around trying to make everything right again, and hilarity ensues. 

I didn't know this reboot existed until sometime within the last ten years. 

I do recall seeing a newspaper article back around 1996 or 1997 that a live-action Laurel and Hardy movie was in a planning stage. But the article was unclear what kind of movie writers and producers were planning. I assumed, based on the 1994 "Little Rascals" reboot, this Laurel and Hardy movie was going to be something similar. That was the last I had heard of it, until I caught wind of this movie within the last ten years. I never watched it until now. 

It might be argued that it's a good introduction for younger people to Laurel and Hardy. On second thought...na'hhh. The real Laurel and Hardy are a great introduction. 

Gailard Sartain and Bronson Pinchot are certainly respectful of the source material. Sartain, especially, does a spot-on portrayal of Oliver Hardy. He often plays southern characters. And Oliver Hardy is a son of Harlem, Ga. So, he's certainly a good casting decision. The performance seems natural to him. 

Gailard Sartain (left) and Bronson Pinchot as Laurel and Hardy in "For Love or Mummy."

Sartain is best known for his role as "Chuck" in the Ernest P. Whirl movies, "Ernest Saves Christmas" and "Ernest Goes to Jail." He plays "Jake the Chef" in "Ernest Goes to Camp." He also plays the same  character in the Saturday morning TV series, "Hey Vern, It's Ernest!"
Bronson Pinchot, of course, is best known for starring as "Balki Bartokomous" in one of my absolute favorite sitcoms, "Perfect Strangers." He also plays "Serge" in all four "Beverly Hills Cop" movies. 

It's worth mentioning Pinchot played Stan Laurel before in the episode "The Gazebo" from season seven, episode six of "Perfect Strangers." 

At times, Pinchot nails his performance as Stan. Other times, it's simply too forced. Pinchot is working as best he can with what he's given. He also always has Stan speak in malapropisms. It's something Stan used to do in the original films on occasion, especially when he would come up with a plan that was actually sensical and sound, until Oliver would ask him to "tell me that again." The joke was Stan couldn't repeat his idea with any sense. In this movie, he does it all the time. 

Perhaps the most unique presence in this movie is that of Academy Award winning actor, F. Murray Abraham. His presence is certainly welcomed as Abraham is an absolutely amazing actor. 

Aside from his role as Antonio Salieri in the 1984 film "Amadeus," which he won an Academy Award for best actor, I love his performance in the 2000 film "Finding Forrester." 

It's worth mentioning Abraham has a cameo as a cab driver in Neil Simon's 1975 movie "The Prisoner of Second Avenue" with Jack Lemmon and Anne Bancroft. One of these days, I want to do a Neil Simon movie-a-thon and really want to talk about that movie. 

Anyways, Stan and Ollie are like fish out of water in this movie, but not in the comedically natural way I'm sure the producers hoped for. It feels way too artificial. Stan and Ollie don't fit in this modern scenario.  

For instance, one scene has Stan driving a modern pickup truck. It just feels off. A lot of the jokes feel off as does a majority of Pinchot's performance as Stan. But to his credit, his respect for Stan Laurel is very visible. 

What makes Laurel and Hardy funny and appreciated is their chemistry, of course. It's also their reactions to everyday situations that really aren't complex, but they make it so. Then they react to each other reacting to their respective situations. 

The scenario provides the complexity and just has "Laurel and Hardy" fumble around reacting to everything. 

It mimics their personalities, but it doesn't capture what made the real Laurel and Hardy funny and enjoyable. The story doesn't feel anything like a Laurel and Hardy feature or short. They don't fit in this story, and the story doesn't fit Laurel and Hardy. 

Still, Bronson Pinchot and Gailard Sartain give their performances their all. The love and respect is there. At the same time, their presence in this movie is like running into Laurel and Hardy entertainers at Universal Studios wandering around entertaining park guests. 

Co-director Larry Harmon, who's famous for playing "Bozo the Clown" owns the rights to Laurel and Hardy. 

His company, "Larry Harmon Pictures" produced a Bozo the Clown Cartoons along with Popeye, Mr. Magoo, Dick Tracy, and even Laurel and Hardy cartoons. Larry Harmon Pictures was later bought by former Disney animator Hal Sutherland along with voice actor Lou Scheimer and became Filmation. Harmon makes a cheap cameo in this movie. 

Anyways, by the final act of the movie, I just didn't care what was happening

My kids and I put on "Ernest Scared Stupid" a few days before I watched this. And this Laurel and Hardy reboot movie feels like something Ernest would appear in. Maybe it should have been called "Ernest Goes to Egypt" or "Ernest Joins a Cult." Jim Varney would fit much better in this scenario than Laurel and Hardy. That's no surprise really as the film's co-director, John R. Cherry III, directed the Ernest movies beginning with "Ernest Goes to Camp" (1987) to "Ernest in the Army" (1998) - not including "Ernest Goes to School" (1994), which was directed by Coke Sams. Hence, the appearance of Gailard Sartain.

The movie also reminds me of something along the lines of "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein." Of course, the writers toss in a few classic Laurel and Hardy routines, such as when they would get their hats switched around, exchange them, and still get their hats mixed up. 

Overall, the comedy and style is very inauthentic so I didn't laugh much. 

Brewster's Millions (1985)

"Monty pitches and I catch. The money won't change us."

Director

Walter Hill

Cast
Richard Pryor - Montgomery Brewster

John Candy - Spike Nolan

Stephen Collins - Warren Cox
Lonette McKee - Angela Drake

Pat Hingle - Edward Roundfiel
Jerry Orbach - Charlie Pegler
Jerome Dempsey - Norris Baxter
David White - George Granville
Hume Cronyn - Rupert Horn

With all the reboots, remakes, and long, long, long awaited sequels hitting theaters the last 15 years, audiences generally think this a result of a creativity shortage in Hollywood. Maybe that's true to a large degree, but there's a lot of writers out there, and there's a lot of sublime and excellence movies coming out that don't often get the same attention as the more anticipated movies do. 

As far as all the remakes and reboots, my normal retort is that these movies are as old as the movie industry itself. There's a lot of classic and well-beloved movies that are remakes of earlier films. "The Wizard of Oz" from 1939 comes directly to mind. 

The 1985 comedy, "Brewster's Millions" with Richard Pryor and John Candy is a perfect example of how movie remakes are nothing new in Hollywood. 

I knew about this movie for decades, but I've never watched it until a few nights ago for a movie night with my wife. She somehow earned a code from Roku and was able to pick a free movie to download on the "My Movies" app. So, this is was the most appealing from the movies we could choose from.

I wanted to get to "Brewster's Millions" while I've been on a John Candy movie binge lately, as I've mentioned in my previous John Candy movie reviews. 

In this movie, Richard Pryor plays Montgomery 'Monty' Brewster who pitches for the minor league team, the  Hackensack Bulls.

He's pals with the Bulls catcher, Spike Nolan (John Candy). After a post-game stop at the local bar, the two get into a big bar brawl and wind up in jail.
They're visited by a stranger named J. B. Donaldo who offers to cover their bail, but they have to plead guilty. 

Once they're out of the slammer, he takes them back to the law firm of Granville & Baxter out in Manhattan. There, Monty is tossed into a meeting with an executor, Edward Roundfield. 

Much to Brewster's shock and surprise, his great-uncle Rupert Horn (Hume Cronyn) suddenly died. Monty didn't even know he had a great-uncle Rupert. What's more shocking is that Rupert is an insanely rich white dude...or, was an insanely rich white dude. And what's even more shocking is that Monty is his only living relative. So, upon Rupert's death, there's no one to inherit his $300 million fortune except Monty. 

Richard Pryor as Monty Brewster in "Brewster's Millions."

However, he's not going to get that fortune without a little catch. He's got two choices. Monty can either take $1 million right away. The law firm would then become the lawful executor of great-uncle Rupert's estate and will collect a service fee, while the rest of the millions will be given to charity. 

Or, he can have $30 million upfront and spend every cent of it within 30 days. 

If he picks the second option, the catch is that despite all the required spending, when the 30 days is up, Brewster cannot own any assets other than what he doesn't already own. If he hires anybody and uses part of the $30 million to pay them, he has to utilize the services he hires them for. 

Brewster cannot destroy or damage any of the items he might purchase. He's permitted to give five percent away to charity, and he can only gamble another five percent. In other words, he can't just give the millions away, nor can he squander all of it on gambling. 

Finally, he cannot tell anyone about this challenge. Not even Spike. If he can spend the entire amount and stick to the rules, he'll inherit the entire $300 million. If he fails, he forfeits all of it and gets nothing. 

Brewster picks the $300 million and doesn't waste a minute in spending his millions. 

Though "Brewster's Millions" has an original feel to it, it's obviously not an original story as I mentioned. 

It's based on the 1902 novel written by George Barr McCutcheon. It was also a Broadway production in 1906 starring Edward Abeles.

The earliest movie based on McCutcheon's book is the 1914 silent comedy movie of the same name directed by none other than Cecil B. DeMille along with Oscar Apfel.

In 1921, another silent movie adaptation, also called "Brewster's Millions," was released. It stars the legendary Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle. 

Over in the U.K., they made their own movie based on the novel in 1935 also called "Brewster's Millions." Their version is a musical comedy directed by Thornton Freeland

Back in the U.S., another remake, again called "Brewster's Millions," was released in 1945 and stars Dennis O'Keefe. And that takes us to the 1985 comedy. 

Richard Pryor, Rick Moranis, and John Candy.

There's a buddy chemistry between Richard Pryor and John Candy. It's unfortunate these two comedians didn't do more movies together.

For a movie starring two of the best comedians in the industry, there's not enough comedy in "Brewster's Millions." In other words, their collective comedic talent isn't used to the fullest extent. Candy and Pryor work well with what their given. But there's so much more room in the premise for more comedy from these guys. And with that buddy chemistry I mentioned, "Brewster's Millions" could have been a decent starting-off point for some more comedies from these guys. 

That's not to say the movie doesn't earn some laughs. There's even a cameo from Rick Moranis.   

Otherwise, "Brewster's Millions" is a story which I can't really compare to any other story though there's a lot of movies about regular people who suddenly strike it rich through some out-of-the-ordinary circumstance, or through a million-to-one stroke of amazing luck. But adding the element of the protagonist being required to spend millions to get millions makes an intriguing and unique comedy.

I previously reviewed the film "Waking Ned Devine" about a jackpot lottery win in a small Irish village. Also the 1954 British comedy, "The Million Pound Note" starring Gregory Peck and based off a story by Mark Twain, led to the 1983 comedy "Trading Places" with Eddie Murphy and Dan Aykroyd. Both are about sudden wealth with main characters who are like fishes out of the water with their fortune. 

In 1979, the "MAD Magazine Board Game" was introduced. In this game, each player starts off with $10,000. And in true MAD Magazine form, satirizing "Monopoly," each player rushes around the board trying to lose all their money. The first loser is the winner. That's the closest thing I can compare the movie to. 

Despite how much more humor from Candy and Pryor that could have been used, the movie is still a fun, fast yet well paced story. Not to mention the moral of the story that money really isn't everything. It's more of a burden than it is a blessing. 

Even so, I can't think of another movie or story that makes its audience want to be in the protagonists spot any more than "Brewster's Millions."