FourAM

I kept waiting for a corporate voiceover to kick in saying "this holiday, shop at Crate & Barrel" or something like that. Everything about her personality seems so artificial and constructed that it's almost like she's acting and reading a script, aping what she thinks celebrating Christmas is. It's too funny hearing the guests talking about how Christmas is all about family togetherness, with Meghan nodding in agreement, yet she's practically estranged from her entire family! The joyous, rich and meaningful Christmas carols interspersed with this inauthentic bland trite is jarring. I'll give it an extra star for being so bad it's almost entertaining to watch and cringe at.

The movie felt like a true follow up to the original for the first 20 or 30 minutes and I was excited to see where it would go, but it pretty quickly fell apart and degenerated into an aimless and unfunny mess as the film went on, starting with the golf course scene with the 3 millennials, all the jokes were awful and the whole sequence was total cringe.

It's like they had a vague idea of what to do but then lost the plot (literally) as time went on, only to finally bring it back around again at the very end of the movie. So much of the cameos were painfully unfunny and poorly acted, they should've done a lot more takes to make them work better and not feel so amateurish and lazy. I couldn't understand a damn thing Bad Bunny said. The pacing felt rushed and unnatural like so many modern Hollywood films, they've lost that magic touch especially when it comes to comedy films.

Sandler's a great dude in real life and I'll give it to him that he does justice to all the original cast who passed away at the end, which is exactly what I expected from him. But most of the middle of the movie is terrible and ruins it, the whole "super golfers" plot was cartoonish and mostly unfunny. If the script had got some rewrites for better jokes, plot, pacing, etc. It could've been one of the best legacy sequels, but alas we are left with this half baked mess.

I thought this would be an interesting watch because it was the first time Scott was being interviewed in 20 years, and with all the evidence and details that have come out in the 20 years since his last interview on TV it would be a perfect opportunity to ask him hard-hitting questions about circumstances he shouldn't be able to really explain logically that point directly to his obvious culpability.

But there was NONE of that!! Every question asked to Scott by the hack interviewer was clearly designed in a way to make it as easy as possible for him to not have to face anything uncomfortable, I could swear the questions were all filtered through his lawyers first!! When you compare the questions he was asked here to the 2003 Diane Sawyer interview it's like night and day, this whole "documentary" was quite obviously designed to trick viewers into making it seem plausible he could be innocent by finding the 4 people in the entire world, plus his crazy obsessed sister-in-law, who are clueless enough to think he's innocent. Anyone with half a brain knows he's guilty, and the "counter-evidence" they present here to try and convince us otherwise is laughable. I have nothing against further DNA testing being done, but we all know it's going to result in nothing other than further cementing his guilt.