La rakontoj mem estas humuraj kaj iom memorigas pri la preskaŭ samperioda usona romano Life With Father.

Leĝera libro, facile legebla, kaj ĝenerale amuza.

The film was considerably better than I expected when I went into it.

The film is essentially a one-joke story, the joke being the cultural differences between a fantasy nation which we shall call Kazakhstan and the United States, or more specifically those parts of it which some of us would like to pretend don’t exist.

And now they’ve remade Kindergarten Cop as The Pacifier, with Vin Diesel attempting — with only limited success — to reprise Arnold Schwarzenegger’s role.

What? You say you recognize the plot? You think that this is a rip-off of 1967’s Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner? Nonsense!

If you liked the original movie, you’ll probably like this one.

From my point of view there are mostly so-so romance films and pretty bad ones. I’ve largely been avoiding them in recent months. This one, however, strikes me as the best since Notting Hill.

The rest of us can find much to enjoy in this film, even when we criticize not only the not-so-occasionally foul language and the near-explicit sex but also the … how shall I put this? … wooden acting.

It’s a shame that — for whatever reason — so few people are going to get to see this movie.

I don’t know that I’d care to recommend this one, but some people thought it was at least decent …

Cady has to sink or swim in a veritable swamp of cliques, jealousies, rivalries and incomprehensible hierarchies

Basically, it’s a story telling about how Jenna’s youthful behavior changed her life in ways of which she is not proud — and how she gets a chance to unmake those changes.

One wonders just how many people suffer from this disability outside of the movies.

If I had to define this movie with a single word, “contrived” would come immediately to mind.

I simply check whether or not anybody in the audience is asleep during the film. By that criterion, this movie certainly qualified as a sleeper.

The running joke is, of course, English’s total incompetence.

You must, far more than in the first film, engage in a little Willing Suspension of Disbelief for this film to make much sense.

Going in to a sneak preview of this film, I kept thinking of Mel Gibson and the somewhat risqué What Women Want. Coming out, I kept thinking of the puerile The Princess Diaries.

Simply put, I don’t much care for people — even fictional ones — who treat other people as nothing but objects, and both of these main characters were doing so.

It’s all a lot of good fun.

I really can’t say why I didn’t like this. Perhaps it was just too good for me.

I saw Schneider’s The Animal, so I should have known what to expect.

Amusing but very, very minor.

There is an overreliance on poo-poo and pee-pee jokes. If these don’t amuse you, you may find the film boring. I drowsed off twice — the first time I’ve done that since Amélie.

There are films for which I might say, “I cannot recommend this film too highly.” For this one, I’ll say the same thing, but hold the last two words. It’s living proof that you shouldn’t make a sequel just for the sake of making a sequel.

Be careful what you wish for. You may get it.

Light fare, amusing — if you like self-embarassment movies — and an enjoyable way of passing an hour and three quarters.

Unfortunately, most of the laughs in this presumably comic film derive from overplayed toilet humor, which few over the age of fifteen will find terribly amusing, unless there is something seriously wrong with civilization as we know it.

Remember that There’s Something About Mary is made by the same people who made Dumb and Dumber.