Following the disappointment that was Road to Perdition, I simply had to watch something else to feel better about my day, so I picked up the 2005 comedy Monster-In-Law, featuring Jennifer Lopez, Jane Fonda, Michael Vartan and Wanda Sykes.
Cover via Amazon
This movie finds Charlie Cantilini (Lopez) falling in love with Kevin Fields (Vartan). After just being forced into retirement by her news station, Kevin’s mom Viola Fields (Fonda) realizes that her son Kevin is all she has left and she’s not interested in anyone taking him away. Viola makes Charlie’s life a living hell in an attempt to cancel the wedding and the stuff she does is absolutely hilarious. Viola’s assistant Ruby (Sykes) helps aid Viola in her schemes and while Sykes plays a secondary role in this movie, I felt her role was extremely important. At times, she was the most comedic person on the screen, so while it was technically a secondary role, the filmmakers really needed someone worthy of a main actor spot in this role, and Sykes fit the mold to a tee.
Lopez and Fonda have great chemistry together which really keeps the laughs coming. Most of the time, I say actors should act, singers should sing because most often actors can’t sing and singers can’t act. This rule of mine usually rings true but there are some exceptions such as Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson. Lopez is also an exception to the rule because she knows how to act and her character is portrayed in a way which is easy to relate to.
I also really appreciated that this was a comedy with an actual plot. I’ve seen way too many comedies with weak plot lines. Too often, comedies are all about the jokes and there’s nearly no plot line at all. If I wanted to hear a bunch of jokes, I’d search comedy stand-up on YouTube, but I didn’t do that did I? No, I came to the theaters or pulled out a movie to watch in the hopes that there’s a decent plot line that can still get me to laugh. This movie succeeded in doing this, so again, thank you filmmakers.
Once again, if you’re new to my blog, I’ve always ranked movies on a scale of 0-100 (I don’t know why, I just always have). Here’s the grading scale.
90-100 It’s a great movie and definitely one worth buying. (Iron Man 3)
80-89 It was a pretty good movie and definitely one worth seeing, but it doesn’t quite scratch my top ten percentile. (Star Trek Into Darkness, Now You See Me, Man of Steel)
70-79 It’s okay but I’ve seen better. It has its moments, but it has its flaws, too. (Oblivion)
60-69 It’s got plenty wrong with it but I still got enjoyment out of this one.
50-59 This movie isn’t intolerable but it’s not blowing my mind either. I’m trying really hard to get some sort of enjoyment out of this. (The Hobbit, After Earth, Road to Perdition)
40-49 This movie is just mediocre. It’s not doing anything other than the bare minimal, so morbidly boring that sometimes I’m actually angry I watched this.
30-39 Definitely worse than mediocre, the 30’s ironically define the 1930’s, full of depression, lack of accomplishments, poverty and just so dumb. (The Contract)
20-29 What did I just watch? Cliches, stupidity, nothingness, did I mention stupidity? Just…wow.
0-19 Watching this movie resulted in one or more of the following: seizure, loss of brain cells, falling asleep/unconsciousness, feel you wasted your time/day, accomplished nothing for you, left the movie knowing less about it then you did going into it, constantly asking yourself why you came to see this movie, or near-death experience. In short, staring at a wall was just as entertaining as watching this movie. This movie deserved a sticker or a label that said, “WARNING: EXTREME AMOUNT OF SUCKAGE.”
My score for Monster-In-Law: 82.
This movie is entertaining to watch. The jokes weren’t ones that made me roll all over the floor, but they were ones that made me chuckle, so a job well done overall. It’s not worthy of being one of my favorite comedies, but it’s a good watch.
*SPOILER ALERT* IF YOU DON’T WANT THE MOVIE SPOILED, STOP READING!!!
*SPOILER’S EDITION*
Truth be told there really isn’t anything to say here. Obviously a comedy has to have a happy ending so you can figure out what happens. The only thing I have to say is Michael Vartan must have been depressed as hell making this movie. His character, Kevin, isn’t very exciting and I don’t see what Charlie sees in him. Throughout the whole movie, he’s entirely oblivious to everything that’s going on between Charlie and Viola and he doesn’t choose a side, partly because he’s oblivious and partly because he doesn’t want to upset anyone. At the end of the day, you feel happy for Charlie, but at the same time you’re wondering why she married a dumb smuck like him. It seriously seems like the guy has no brain function and the fact that he’s supposed to be a doctor makes this even worse because you would think a doctor would have a head on his shoulders. Definitely not Vartan’s best performance, but maybe poor script writing is partly to blame for that.
wordsofwistim 