Review: Rock Of Ages

(Dir: Adam Shankman, 2012)

I consider myself a pretty omnivorous film watcher, but one genre that always escapes my attention is musicals. You can't argue with a bit of Grease, but I can honestly say I find it extremely difficult to get excited about watching something where the narrative is consistently broken (or moved along) by song and dance. It just irritates me and I find myself going into active avoidance mode. So why oh why when I started seeing trailers for Rock Of Ages did I sit there thinking, I really want to watch that!? That doesn’t usually happen to me. But I ummed and arred about it, heard it was getting bad reviews and finally relented, drawn to the cinema like a moth to flame.

Predictably the story is as clichéd as they come. It’s 1987 and Sherrie (Julianne Hough) steps off the bus in LA with stars in her eyes and nothing but a suitcase full of rock records in her hand and a desire to sing. By chance she meets Drew (Diego Boneta), a barman and budding singer, outside the legendary home of rock n’roll on Sunset Strip, the Bourbon Room, where he gets her a job and the two fall for each other. Inside, club owner Dennis (Alec Baldwin) is counting on legendary rock star Stacee Jaxx (Tom Cruise) to play a show that will earn him enough money to save the club, whilst Jaxx’s slimy manager Paul (Paul Giamatti) has other ideas and the new mayor’s prim wife (Catherine Zeta-Jones) is on a desperate mission to clean up the Strip and close the club.

So here’s the big surprise - I thoroughly enjoyed Rock Of Ages. Who’d have thought it? After getting past the slightly awkward opening scene on the bus as Sherrie arrives, I got into the rhythm of the film and how it uses song and dance. And it’s the music that made it work for me, using classic 80’s rock and hair metal songs alongside a handful original numbers, rather than going the route of all original music. As someone who's deeply intoxicated with metal and rock this is music that appeals to me, and although it's not the exact music I grew up with (Guns N’Roses aside), it reaches back to the core of my music tastes. Even as I get older I've found myself developing a small appreciation for the power ballads of the eighties. For my money this certainly beats the show tunes from musicals of old.

The other big positive is the fantastic cast they’ve assembled. Hough and Boneta are both credible leads, can sing and look hot. In fact I got so caught up I found myself falling for Hough’s character as well, which always helps you buy into a film. Baldwin, Giamatti, Zeta-Jones and Russell Brand (his character works in the club too) all put in good turns, even if their singing is not that fantastic, but it was still nice to see some solid recognisable faces. As a lot of people have been pointing out Cruise is pretty much the highlight. Playing a burnt-out over-excessed rock god befits him. He looks the part, seems constantly trashed and is clearly having a lot fun. And when he’s on stage he has the requisite charisma and power, but also manages to bring a bit of hidden depth later on. All hail Stacee Jaxx! 

The set and production design are all solid, balancing the right amount of glamour and sleazy rock n’roll. The eighties costumes are enjoyable too, particularly Boneta’s when things take a change in direction for him in the second half. I also liked the Tower Records scenes – there was something satisfying about spotting the records they had on shelves, seeing posters on the wall for bands like Slayer and Iron Maiden, and best of all noticing such minor details as the old yellow Tower Records price tags, which took me back!

All in all I really enjoyed Rock Of Ages, probably a lot more than I expected. It’s not a great film by any means and it is ridiculously cheesy and unoriginal. It also suffers from some bad pacing, being far longer than necessary and dragging a lot in the second half due to the story's imbalanced structure. But for enjoyment purposes alone that’s something I was able to overlook. The music makes it, as does the cast. Without a connection to rock n'roll and the sounds of this era I can see it being another bland musical to some. Does it change my feelings towards musicals? Not really; Rock Of Ages just appeared to be the rare example of one that might work for me, and it did, offering a nice change of pace from my usual viewing. Now to get all those songs out of my head.

Review: Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter

(Dir: Timur Bekmambetov, 2012)

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is a film with a concept so outlandish that it had an equal chance of turning out to be inspired brilliance or a terrible hugely expensive mistake. The story is as simple as the name suggests – the 16^th President of the United States has a secret life as a vampire hunter, or did before taking office. After seeing his mother murdered by a vampire when he was a child Abraham Lincoln (Benjamin Walker) swore vengeance, but after a failed opportunity to send this bloodsucker back to hell, Henry (Dominic Cooper) comes into his life and trains him up on how to slay the living dead. Thus he sets about slaughtering vampires, falls in love with Mary Todd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) and ends up becoming President.

So let me say from the outset, I like the idea of Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter. It’s ridiculousness makes it sound like a lot of fun and there’s nothing like subverting history in such a wild way. However that all becomes a waste of time when the film turns out to be a horrible turgid mess. Any good will from the idea quickly dissipates when you realise that this film isn’t actually going to be any fun at all.

Firstly, from a technical perspective, it’s horribly shot and visually looks washed out, like a poor quality low budget film, not a big budget Hollywood movie. This isn’t aided by the filmmakers aiming for over-stylised; so we get the now overused super-slow-motion moments in the middle of action sequences, which can sometimes work well in films (300 for example) but not here, and an overabundance of CGI which frequently looks fake and frustratingly jarring. I watched it in 2D – I can only imagine how bad it looked in 3D. And then there’s the editing which is at times abysmal. The film doesn’t really flow well and there were a few occasions where I thought, did I just briefly fall asleep and miss something? No. I didn’t fall asleep, not once. The film was just missing the fluidity and basic coherence required for certain scenes to make sense, which is just shoddy. Take the train on burning bridge sequence – that’s a masterclass on how not to edit an action scene.  

A film like this should be fun and entertaining, yet it ends up feeling like a dull lesson in politics. Really, why? No-one who watches this wants a plodding history lesson. Now I know a little bit of politics is inescapable considering Lincoln is involved, but we instead manage to lose the vampire hunting version of him for a good chunk in the middle of the film, particularly when they decide to jump twenty or thirty years so they can make the second half of the film about Gettysburg, which was a terrible decision for the story. And the less said about the poor ageing make-up, which barely aged some and massively aged others, the better.

From a casting perspective I found Benjamin Walker to be thoroughly bland and actually quite irritating as Lincoln, particularly the younger version. He has height on his side though. Mary Elizabeth Winstead didn’t feel right in her role either, whilst Rufus Sewell as the head vampire bad guy is pretty uninspiring and toothless. I have two positives to note about the film, firstly Cooper did a good job as Henry and I enjoyed his presence, so any scene with him was automatically better than everything else. Secondly, Walker can wield an axe very effectively (Lincoln’s vampire slaying weapon of choice) and those moments of vertiginous swinging briefly threatened to swathe some interest through the rest of the turgid mire. That was until it connected with rubbish and unscary CGI vampires.

Boring as hell, uninspired and technically a total mess – that’s the best way I can describe Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter. The only other Timur Bekmambetov film I’ve seen is Wanted so I really shouldn’t be surprised by this. Likewise Tim Burton’s involvement as producer seems appropriate considering his form since the end of the nineties (see my Dark Shadows review). This is a B-Movie writ large as a Hollywood summer blockbuster. The two rarely mesh. I couldn’t help but think of Iron Sky with it’s own ridiculous concept (Nazi’s that have been hiding on the dark side of the moon invade Earth), which despite being a bad film is still a lot of fun and manages to be incisive about politics through some very funny OTT humour, but that exhibits pure B-Movie aesthetics which is exactly what’s missing from Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter. If I hadn’t watched The Devil Inside this year, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter would be the worst film I’ve seen so far in 2012. It’s really bad. Don’t waste your time.

Review: Red Lights

(Dir: Rodrigo Cortés, 2012)

Red Lights is one of those films that strangely appears to have snuck under the radar a bit. Directed by Rodrigo Cortés, the man responsible for the fantastically breathless Buried, which was one of the most thrilling and claustrophobic experiences I had in the cinema in 2010 (although how it translates to the safer and controllable home viewing experience I'm reluctant to find out in case it desacralizes my perception of it based on experiencing it in the cinema), this gives him a bigger budget, more famous faces and more locations to play with.

The story focuses on Matheson (Sigourney Weaver), a psychology lecturer specialising in the paranormal, who along with her physicist assistant and protégé (Cillian Murphy), also investigate supposed parapsychological events. They are experts and know all the tricks of the trade. But when the mysterious Simon Silver (Robert De Niro), one of the most famous psychics in the world who has been quietly absent for thirty years, suddenly appears back on the scene to stage some final shows and prove once and for all that he is the real deal and that psychic abilities do exist, the desire to investigate him takes hold, leading to conflict and some expectedly weird shit happening.

I like the way that Red Lights approached its subject matter. The area of parapsychology is an interesting one and the film takes a more objective approach, mirroring the beliefs of its protagonists. They’re happy to routinely debunk the events that people are fooled into believing are real, but it seems they almost want to find something genuine in order to validate what they’re doing, after so many years of seeing only cons and fakes. Then there’s one characters logic as to why it’s impossible for them to turn off a relatives life support – there’s a sad truth to it, which is a key motivator for their actions. I left the cinema mulling things over and that’s always a good sign.

The casting in Red Lights is spot on. Murphy is an always reliable actor and continuing that theme here he is likeable and engaging as one of the leads, with a slight air of mystery around him and his dogged determination. This is the most I’ve enjoyed watching Weaver on screen in ages – lately she’s cropped up in small roles playing too similar a character (The Cold Light Of Day, Abduction, Rampart), but here she has a lot more to do and is perfectly suited to this character. I also appreciated the irony of her playing a character similar in some ways to Dr Peter Venkman! De Niro is also on good form, very restrained as the enigmatic and abstruse Silver, not showing his hand or overplaying it, which seems contrary to the De Niro we’ve seen in recent years. Toby Jones, Elizabeth Olsen and Joely Richardson all crop up in supporting roles and all put in reliable turns as should be expected from these actors.

The look and feel of Red Lights fits well as there’s nothing too showy about it, but there is a certain steeliness. It’s not a film that revels in sunlight nor is it one drowned in darkness, but there's a fascinating depth within the blackness when this is utilised. Essentially I liked how it was shot and lit. There are second half problems however, as it feels like it loses its way a little after a specific halfway point plot decision. Up until this it felt very measured and rational, but something more desperate and slightly chaotic takes hold after and I wish it had stayed on its original track without going in that direction. Also, the ending seemed pretty unsatisfactory at the time, but now I’ve had time to think about it I like it more and more as I can see some interesting logic with it.

I liked Red Lights. The story is interesting and the way it was shot and acted means it coalesces nicely. There is also a degree of intelligence to it which always helps greatly. Despite having some issues with the second half they weren’t enough to ruin the film for me, and the more I think about the ending the more I like it as I see a certain depth. So, Red Lights is a solid drama / thriller that’s worth a watch, and I remain intrigued about Cortés as a director and what he will give us next.

Review: Cosmopolis

(Dir: David Cronenberg, 2012)

Any new David Cronenberg film is something to get excited about. Over the past forty years Cronenberg has proven himself to be the master at mixing intelligence with darkness, shocking horror and the bizarre. He’s one of my favourite directors. His recent work has shifted focus from the disquieting body horror of old towards something more restrained in its acuity. A Dangerous Method, his last film, may have felt like a toned down version of Crash, but rather than taking that film’s stark approach of documenting the cold metallic sexual dysmorphia of it’s protagonists, A Dangerous Method chose restraint and a more clinical analysis based on words over visuals. This trend continues with Cosmopolis, his latest film.

Based on the Don DeLillo novel from 2003, Cosmopolis centers on young billionaire businessman Eric Packer (Robert Pattinson) who decides one morning he wants to get a haircut across town, setting him on a journey in the protective bubble of his modified stretch limousine. With the limo functioning as a mobile office people come and go throughout his journey, but all the while various events transpire to make his world start to crumble around him.

I’ve not read the original book but having read two other DeLillo novels (End Zone and Underworld) I felt I was somewhat prepared for what to expect. This isn’t easy going light entertainment of the ilk that Pattinson’s core audience are probably used too, this is dialogue heavy with a great use of language full of weighty ideas. It’s cerebral. This is not a watch once and fully understand everything that’s being discussed type of film, unless of course you know the book or are way more intelligent than I. There’s plenty I didn’t grasp or fully appreciate. I’m not sure I can adequately talk about everything that I do know was discussed and debated. I kind of like it that way. 

Pattinson is the core of the film. Everything revolves around his character so this casting was critical. He works in the role; he’s loquacious, narcissistic and carries a devious intelligence that belies his age but not his power. Dialogue is delivered well and it’s a fascinating script, even if at times it’s a bit of struggle to fully grasp. However it gets easier once we’ve settled into the cadence of DeLillo’s language and Pattinson’s delivery and there are some intriguing discussions. The one that particularly stands out (essentially every scene amounts to a conversation with someone who appears for only one scene, with one or two exceptions) involves Paul Giamatti, who does a fantastic job and there’s great vocal sparring between the pair.

There is a slight theatrical vibe to the film, with a good proportion of the events tied to the single location of the limousine, but this doesn’t get suffocating as Packer does escape its confines venturing into restaurants, bookshops, hotels. Cronenberg has never struck me as someone who directs with great visual flair, rather he always lets the content do the talking, and things are no different here, which really puts the focus on the actors and the dialogue. The portentous use of sound adds another interesting layer too.

How much I liked Cosmopolis is somewhat determined by how much of an enigma it remains to me. I didn’t gain enough to fully understand everything it was reaching for, but its thoughts on economics, business, technology, sex, power, existence and more, intrigued me and are awaiting greater unravelling with further viewings. Admittedly films of this cerebral nature appeal to me because I like the challenge they present and Cronenberg’s films have always played with this. The stripped down dialogue-led style works, although part of me still hungers for the twisted viscera of old. Whether his intention is to leave that style behind for good, I don't know, but despite Cosmopolis not standing anywhere close to his best work, it fits neatly with the direction he’s been heading in recently and retains a voracity for ideas that is reassuring. I will definitely be rewatching Cosmopolis, and as ever I remain intrigued about where Cronenberg will go next.

Review: Prometheus

(Dir: Ridley Scott, 2012)

Expectations for a film based on its trailer are one thing, but expectations based on just the idea / concept of the film are quite another. When it was announced that Ridley Scott would be making a prequel to / another film in the Alien universe, the internet practically self combusted with geek excitement. Alien is after all one of the seminal sci-fi/horror’s of the last few decades, beautifully nuanced in its slow build of terror and isolation. Scott arguably made the right decision not to come back for a sequel as it allowed us James Cameron’s superbly amped up Aliens and David Fincher’s Alien³, which deviated the story in an interesting direction. But fortunately Scott saw the light and realised he had unfinished business in this universe, or with sci-fi at least, and so we have Prometheus.

The story follows the crew of the spaceship Prometheus in the year 2093, on an exploratory mission to find what they believe to be mankind’s makers, following clues left by many ancient civilisations, deciphered by scientists Elizabeth (Noomi Rapace) and Charlie (Logan Marshall-Green). Funded by the famed Weyland Corporation, this leads the crew, including captain Janek (Idris Elba), Meredith Vickers (Charlize Theron) and David (Michael Fassbender), to a moon many millions of light years away from Earth where they find... something.

Prometheus was intended to exist as a sci-fi film in its own right, but one that also kind of acts as a precursor to the Alien series if you look a little closer. It balances this superbly. The metaphysical nature of the story about man trying to meet his maker in order to rationalise existence is an interesting one, but as it progresses it’s suffused with the thought that maybe we might not want to know the answer as it might not be what we want. It might disappoint.

As to how the film is infused with the DNA of the Alien franchise, I was impressed with how this was approached. There are many visual cues that harken back – darkened corridors; the Geiger-like creepy synthesis of the organic and mechanical; chambers filled with multitudes of the unknown; harsh howling winds; a determined female lead – it does the right amount for us to feel it’s symbiotically connected, but this doesn’t overpower. I thought it presented and answered enough whilst still leaving plenty to be considered. After all, what fun would it be if everything was laid out explicitly?

The acting and casting is solid. Rapace is good as the lead and has the right amount of conviction, whilst Theron plays her role as the steely shepherd of the expedition well. The highlight however is Fassbender’s David. He is a synthetic human, much like Ian Holm’s Ash and Lance Henriksen’s Bishop in previous films, with a coldness about him that you can’t escape, even in his attempts at warmth. There is something unnerving about the character, not only seen in his calculated actions but also his ever so slightly perfect appearance that never changes. Yet again Fassbender proves he’s one of the best actors in the business.

The direction is spot on and it’s a well structured story, and while it feels like it packs a lot in it still takes time to build, until eventually the cavalcade of events intensify into a fitting crescendo. The script by Jon Spaihts and Damon Lindelof (the latter of Lost fame) balances the scientific, ideological and (some) character development well despite some frustrating character actions. On top of this the visual effects and sound design are both excellent. It’s all very big and dramatic as befits sci-fi, but also manages to employ some interesting retro looking effects as a way of viewing past events. Visual aesthetics have always been a strength of the Alien films.  

Prometheus is a classy sci-fi film that thoroughly worked for me. I tried to keep my expectations to the minimum as there was so much obfuscation around what we would actually get, but the decision to approach this as a standalone sci-fi film that happens to provide some explanations about the origins of the xenomorphs whilst also examining mankind's origins, was definitely the right one. You could watch this having never seen any of the Alien films and not feel like you’re missing anything, whilst existing fans will love all the little details that link it. Scott’s decision to return to the genre proves to have been an extremely successful one and it’ll be very interesting to see where this may lead in the future.

Review: Snow White and the Huntsman

(Dir: Rupert Sanders, 2012)

Expectations built up by a trailer are a funny thing. The trailer for Snow and the Huntsman did a great job of selling me a movie that I expected to have very little interest in. Frankly I thought it made it look great. But alongside that I’ve had a couple of preconceptions about this film due to Mirror Mirror unexpectedly delivering an interesting and visually sumptuous version of the Snow White story earlier this year. My expectations for that film based on its trailer were that it would be rubbish. It wasn’t. So Snow White and the Huntsman had something to live up to. The reality is, I should know better than to set high expectations for a film based on a trailer as frequently the full package doesn’t deliver.

This version of the Snow White story establishes things in the standard way then approaches the rest from a slightly different angle. The evil queen Ravenna (Charlize Theron) quickly takes control of the throne and locks Snow White (Kristen Stewart) away in the castle. Some years later she escapes and the Huntsman (Chris Hemsworth) is brought in to find and bring her back so the queen can gain eternal youth. But upon tracking her down he decides to protect her, leading to them they traipsing across the land to a friendly duke who will help overthrow the queen. On the way a few of the standard Snow White story elements are worked in – poison apples, dwarves and the like. 

Two of the big selling points in the trailer were the suggestion it might be Lord Of the Rings lite and also some fascinating dark imagery around the queen. The film certainly aims for something closer to this territory than a standard fairytale, although perhaps it’s fair to say Snow White and the Huntsman is more akin to the Narnia films, minus talking animals. I thought this an interesting way to approach the story. But the best parts of the film involve the queen. Theron goes into overacting territory a bit but it doesn’t matter so much as it works for the character and she does seem genuinely evil. The continual decimation of everything beautiful around her to quench her savage narcissism and desire for immortality is born of desperation, as she barely manages to maintain face and keep from appearing to her kingdom as the old crone she really is. The surrounding dark imagery heightens her perniciousness and really lifts these scenes.

It’s a shame then that Stewart doesn’t work at all in the role of Snow White. Just to be clear from the outset as I know she has a lot of haters, I’m not one. I loved her in Adventureland and she was good in The Runaways, but both of those characters had a similar vibe that suits her look and how she comes across, which also seems to work within the hollowness of the Twilight films. It just doesn’t work as Snow White. She lacks the overwhelming beauty that this character should possess and comes across with zero personality. There’s a vacant emotionlessness with no hidden layers which makes her something of a cipher, so it’s impossible to care about her character and she makes no impact in the film. If you compare her to the pulchritudinous of Lily Collins in Mirror Mirror you would not believe they are portraying the same character. I know why Stewart was cast but for a film this big it would be futile to argue the point of art over marketability.

Chris Hemsworth fares better and since Thor I’ve become a fan of his. He exudes a likeable physical presence on the screen, however his accent in the film is both inexplicable and irritating, which really distracted me. As did the dwarves. There seemed to be something quite curious about casting people like Ian MacShane, Ray Winstone, Bob Hoskins, Toby Jones and Nick Frost as dwarves, but it didn’t work. Despite adding a few mild moments of comedy it was jarring seeing these actors like this, and although I can see they tried to address that by disguising them with make-up and funny hair styles, it seems ludicrous that these roles didn’t actually go to actors of the right stature.

Another poor decision was the choice of director. This was the debut of Rupert Sanders, making him a surprising choice for the producers to gamble on considering this is a big budget summer movie. Sanders does get some really good visuals, but the film itself is boring and ponderous. The first half hour or so is fairly interesting, but once they leave the dark forest interest quickly wanes, only to be enlivened in the moments when Theron is back on screen. Just don’t get me started on the scenes in fairy Sanctuary which felt totally awkward and dissonant with the rest of the film. 

Snow White and the Huntsman was disappointing. Curiously it managed to nail the darker side of the story but failed on all the other aspects, resulting in a mostly boring film that didn’t manage to offer anything more than a few interesting visuals. With a more suitable and engaging lead actress perhaps it would’ve been improved but I think a lot of fault lies in the direction too. There was plenty of potential with the route the story took, but it was squandered. Tarsem’s Mirror Mirror had many flaws, but it worked and felt like a more considered and interesting attempt at this classic tale. Watch Snow White and the Huntsman if you want something dull and lifeless with a dark edge; watch Mirror Mirror (review here) if you want something fun, vibrant and beautiful that actually feels like a fairytale brought to life.

Review: American Reunion

(Dir: Jon Hurwitz & Hayden Schlossberg, 2012)

I read something recently that astounded me – American Pie has spawned seven sequels. Yes, seven! That’s a pretty impressive feat, clearly mimicking the churn and burn production line of horror sequels à la Saw and Friday 13th, and I’m sure none of those involved with the original film expected to be able to milk the franchise that much. Of course they’ve reached a direct-to-DVD point of quality where the only consist elements are Eugene Levy and a lead character with the name Stifler. Until American Reunion that is, the seventh and latest sequel where the entire cast of the first two films have returned, after evidently realising that their careers haven’t amounted to as much as the success of the first two films seemingly promised them.

So it’s thirteen years since the first American Pie, everyone has adult lives and are only casually in touch with each other, until they all reunite over a weekend for their high school reunion. This inevitably leads to long forgotten emotions surfacing, carnage and lots of nudity. As a concept this is a decent and believable way to get an original cast back together after all this time, so it’s just a shame it doesn’t actually add up to much here.

American Reunion suffers from making it's characters regress, rather than giving the audience as much full on nostalgia as it could've. Initially it’s good to see these old faces together again and watch them reconnect, but then it quickly descends into a bunch of 30 year olds acting like they’re back in high school which really isn’t much fun to watch. Perhaps it was too much to expect it to have moved on from this a bit? But maybe this was done because the characters appear far less interesting at this stage of their lives. Jim (Jason Biggs) and Michelle (Alyson Hannigan) are married with a kid. They seem boring. Oz (Chris Klein) is a tv personality with a crazy model girlfriend. He seems bored. Kevin (Thomas Ian Nicholas) is under the thumb of his nice wife. Dull. Finch (Eddie Kaye Thomas) remains enigmatic and here at least there is something more genuinely interesting going on.

Then there’s the other big issue which can be summed up in one word – Stifler. Seann William-Scott’s character has always been the hardest to take in this franchise because of his charmless frat-boy-like idiocy. Here it’s amplified and feels more jarring because his character hasn’t grown up and is exactly the same, with his borderline obsessive sexual fascination. This was disappointing to see after William-Scott’s great performance in Goon, which seemed to break him free from the stereotyping this annoying character has brought his career.

And now I’m going to complain about the films preoccupation with sex. I know that was a key element of American Pie, but now it’s monotonous. Thirteen years on and it still seems like it’s the be all and end all of their lives. Maybe it’s an accurate reflection of society, but unfortunately it leaves us with cringeworthy plotlines like Jim having to keep fending off his hot eighteen year old neighbour who wants to lose her virginity with him, just as an excuse to create poor dramatic tension as he keeps it secret, and to show us some breasts. It all feels dumb and regressive.

American Reunion was disappointing. I appreciated the nostalgia, there were a few laughs and kudos for getting so many of the original supporting cast back, but it didn’t get close to living up to either of the first two films. I wonder if it is the age thing? American Pie is one of those films synonymous with university for me – it was funny, fresh and somewhat relatable, as well as having a fantastic soundtrack that represented my music taste of the time. I guess now I’ve just grown up a lot more than the characters have and watching them acting like horny schoolboys all over again has lost it’s lustre. If it had’ve been a lot funnier and they cut back on Stifler maybe I’d have been more forgiving, but as it is I’m hoping we’re not subjected to anymore reunions.