- Real Estate
- Food & Drink
- Things to Do
Sequel to the decent comedy is vapidly, incompetently bad
A BAD MOMS CHRISTMAS (Jon Lucas, Scott Moore). 111 minutes. Opens Wednesday (November 1). See listing. Rating: N
It hasn’t even been a year and a half since Bad Moms shook up the summer of 2016, and the whole gang is back for the holiday sequel, A Bad Moms Christmas. But you know what they say: “Fast, cheap and good pick any two.”
A Bad Moms Christmas must have been cheap, because it is not good at all. In fact, it’s so vapidly, incompetently bad that it’s a shock to realize it was made by the same creative team as the first.
The initial Bad Moms may not have been inspired, but it was entertaining, with fun performances by Mila Kunis, Kristen Bell and Kathryn Hahn as a trio of suburban Chicago mothers whose decision to embrace their impulsive side (and drink at lunch) leads to liberation.
This one, set in the week leading up to Christmas, introduces the Moms’ own moms (respectively a frosty Christine Baranski, a clingy Cheryl Hines and a scheming Susan Sarandon) and lets the personality conflicts spill out between drinking binges and trips to the mall.
Indifferently directed and scripted, the whole thing feels like it was built out of scraps, with half a dozen montage sequences to pad out the running time – though there is no earthly reason this thing needed to be almost two hours long. Maybe writer/directors Jon Lucas and Scott Moore didn’t have the time for a tighter edit, or maybe they just didn’t care. It’s not like anybody has to pay for film any more, right?
The only scene that sort of works is the one where Hahn’s lonely esthetician falls for a male stripper (Justin Hartley) while waxing his balls, and it makes me sad that I just typed that sentence.
Please don’t give this movie your money.