Small Screen Reviews: The Do-Over

 
awful

This isn’t a promotion. That’s Adam Sandler taking aim at Netflix audiences so foolish as to watch this movie.

A couple years back, Adam Sandler signed a deal with Netflix to produce four movies. The first of these, The Ridiculous 6, got a big ol’ goose egg on Rotten Tomatoes. That’s right: It got a zero rating. On the bright side, that means Sandler can only go up, right? Enter this year’s offering, The Do-Over, starring Sandler and David Spade. How does this movie fare? Well … let’s just say that, occasionally, your television and streaming reviewer here watches things so that you don’t have to watch them. In this case, you owe me. Owe you me big time.

The concept sounds like something that should make a decent (though maybe not great) action comedy. Fellow SNL alumnus David Spade stars as Charlie, a beta male so beta that he gets beaten up by other beta males. He’s a gamma male. He works as bank manager in a grocery store bank, his hot wife is having a blatantly open affair with her ex-husband while Charlie financially supports said couple’s twin sons, who have less respect for Charlie than Democrats do for the Constitution. I am inserting politics in this discussion because anything is better than this movie.

At his twenty-five year high school reunion (wait … is twenty-five a thing? I thought it was every ten years. Was I snubbed?) Charlie runs into Max, an old friend. Max (Sandler) was that crazy friend so many of us had in our teen years: the guy with no impulse control, strangely violent tendencies, and a career path that was about as promising as a peanut butter and mackerel sandwich. Well, lo and behold, Max reveals he is now an FBI agent and Charlie is soon spending a weekend with his old friend on a yacht where he can forget his miserable life. Then, the boat explodes and Max reveals he faked their deaths so that Charlie and he could start over. Ensuing hilarity is promised but never delivered.

Seriously, it’s a good concept that could make for a passable movie. Instead, we’re treated to disgusting gags about their brief hedonistic life and it just gets worse from there. Every time a layer is peeled from this story, it just gets worse. The jokes are so crude and sophomoric that sophomores may have grounds for a defamation suit. This is what you get when you let Sandler do his own thing without limits. I’d sooner watch Me, Myself, & Irene again; that movie made me gag 75 percent of the time, but at least I sometimes laughed.

And that’s the thing. This movie is supposed to be a comedy. It’s supposed to be laughed at. Instead you just shift in your seat uncomfortably and wish it away. This movie requires a panic room you can flee to so the movie can’t hurt you (And yes, I just blatantly stole a Family Guy gag; this movie is so bad that I can do that and feel like I’m still in good taste). This movie elicited one laugh from me, and that was from when I watched the trailer. That’s it. There was one laugh and they wasted it on the trailer.

I don’t just want my ninety minutes back: I want them back with the interest a loan shark would charge. As far as I can tell, Adam Sandler is waging a personal war against streaming video content and hes’s winning. He’s got two more movies to go, people. Two more. There is no justice in the world.

Published in Entertainment
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 38 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    Thank you for watching for me and giving out this valuable warning.  Honor to you good, sir.  Honor to you.

    • #1
  2. C. U. Douglas Coolidge
    C. U. Douglas
    @CUDouglas

    Brian Wolf:Thank you for watching for me and giving out this valuable warning. Honor to you good, sir. Honor to you.

    I had a beer during this movie. It did not help.

    • #2
  3. Austin Murrey Inactive
    Austin Murrey
    @AustinMurrey

    Hat tipped – I like the premise but didn’t trust Sandler to deliver. Guess I was right to.

    • #3
  4. C. U. Douglas Coolidge
    C. U. Douglas
    @CUDouglas

    Austin Murrey:Hat tipped – I like the premise but didn’t trust Sandler to deliver. Guess I was right to.

    You were very right. Thing is, I like some of Sandler. Happy Gilmore remains one of my favorite golf films. It didn’t look like a great film on the trailer, but I thought, “Well maybe there will be some passable laughs.” But there wasn’t.

    • #4
  5. Mendel Inactive
    Mendel
    @Mendel

    I am puzzled by the Sandler phenomenon. I agree with CUD that Happy Gilmore was a college classic, as were several of his other movies from that era.

    But almost every one of Sandler’s more recent movies seems to be an absolute drain circler, yet he keeps getting new and lucrative deals. Is he intentionally phoning it in? Is this some type of strange corner of the free market where making something of intentionally poor quality sells?

    I suppose one could argue he’s still coasting on his previous reputation, but the current target audience wasn’t even sentient when Happy Gilmore came out.

    Scratching my head.

    • #5
  6. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    Your too late, I already watched this piece of tripe.  Adam Sandler needs to either get a new shtick or retire from the field.  His brand of comedy played well for a short time, but times change and actors are supposed to grow.  Unfortunately Sandler never has and what was cutesy once is now well past its sale by date.  I will give it this much.  This movie is marginally better than his last Netflix endeavor.  Marginally.

    • #6
  7. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    The ridiculous six was pretty funny, I thought, though nothing like the better Sandler movies, nor innovative enough. This one seems too silly to me. I think I understand what he’s trying to do, but I’m not sure unleashing him was a good idea. His success has always depended to an extent on a combative relationship with public sentiment. This new stuff is unmoored.

    Of course, his bad movies are not really worse than many movies that are tolerated or that are supposed to be good & become prestigious. People are just too moralistic. There is no good reason why this guy should have a bad name in America while people like Mr. Tarantino are laughing from the Oscars to the bank.

    • #7
  8. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    C. U. Douglas: Seriously, I look at that, and it could be a good concept.

    This is the tragedy of virtually all of Adam Sandler’s movies.

    Virtually all the terrible ones actually had really interesting premises, while the few “good” ones at the beginning of his career had really stupid premises, if you think about ’em.

    (Caveat: I do not count non-Happy Madison movies, such as Punch Drunk Love or Funny People, as true “Adam Sandler movies”. They weren’t produced by Sandler’s own movie-making machine, therefore they don’t count.)

    • #8
  9. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    Now, as for the plot of the movie, if you’ve read the description above, that’s almost all you need to understand what’s going on here. It’s supposed to tell weak men that complaining about their lives is stupid–instead, they should be dedicating themselves to improving democracy by fighting ugly oligarchic things–I guess, corporations…–& that they’ll get a sense of dignity from that.

    All of the deceptions going on in the first act are supposed to tell people that if they’re fantasies are reducible to spring break forever, they might as well be dead, because they’re not really human. The really ugly humor is on the one hand supposed to show comic seriousness–there is nothing at which Mr. Sandler will blush–& on the other to show how stupid the fantasy is that tells people that the only thing they’d need to be happy is to be rich & alone to indulge their fantasies. I’m not sure he’s offered proof positive–even in comic terms–but that’s what’s going on.

    The gradual revelations in the third act about how dangerous the action hero’s situation is–because of the disease the corporation doesn’t want cured…–that’s supposed to show seriousness about doing something good. Put together, the irresponsible guy becoming a hero is supposed to suggest that normal people get depressed when times are hard or life doesn’t work out–so they need relentless friends…

    • #9
  10. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    Misthiocracy:

    C. U. Douglas: Seriously, I look at that, and it could be a good concept.

    This is the tragedy of virtually all of Adam Sandler’s movies.

    Virtually all the terrible ones actually had really interesting premises, while the few “good” ones at the beginning of his career had really stupid premises, if you think about ’em.

    (Caveat: I do not count non-Happy Madison movies, such as Punch Drunk Love or Funny People, as true “Adam Sandler movies”. They weren’t produced by Sandler’s own movie-making machine, therefore they don’t count.)

    I would say, better to say it’s the problem with what people call American culture. Few people have better ideas than this guy & as a whole the country lacks competence or interest in producing really good democratic comedy.

    • #10
  11. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Titus Techera: Of course, his bad movies are not really worse than many movies that are tolerated or that are supposed to be good & become prestigious.

    You should watch the Red Letter Media review for Jack & Jill, for an illustration of how and why the Happy Madison machine can be worse than the usual H0llywood drek. Sandler’s business model takes it one step further than mere artistic bankruptcy.

    They take an ENTIRE HOUR to explore the film’s crapulence.

    • #11
  12. C. U. Douglas Coolidge
    C. U. Douglas
    @CUDouglas

    Titus, let me contrast your explanation with another film, Clerks 2. There’s a similar make-up in there – crude humor surrounding a film which hides a deeper premise the film maker wants to explore. In this case, Clerks 2, explores the concept of friendship between two men and the conflict of doing what you believe you’re supposed to succeed and what is better for your pursuit of happiness. The crudeness of the film is over the top, but in part because Kevin Smith seeks to portray a couple of low-middle class Jersey boys discussing pop culture, but also in part as the character Randall is trying to sabotage Dante’s plans for the future – plans that Randall believes to be poor for Dante and Dante’s personal relations. There’s a veracity to the crudeness that frequently goes over the top. And Smith at least aspires to some sort of depth of thought. And Smith at least is cognizant that he can go so far.

    In The Do-Over, the crudeness doesn’t reach that level. Though it could serve the purposes you mention, it rarely reaches that level of thought. Sandler tends to wallow in this mire, and take the audience with him rather than tie it with a point.

    • #12
  13. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    Misthiocracy:

    Titus Techera: Of course, his bad movies are not really worse than many movies that are tolerated or that are supposed to be good & become prestigious.

    You should watch the Red Letter Media review for Jack & Jill, for an illustration of how and why the Happy Madison machine can be worse than the usual H0llywood drek. Sandler’s business model takes it one step further than mere artistic bankruptcy.

    They take an ENTIRE HOUR to explore the film’s crapulence.

    I saw the movie with my own eyes. I didn’t think it was all that bad.

    • #13
  14. thelonious Member
    thelonious
    @thelonious

    There is no worse movie than “That’s My Boy.”  Horrible just horrible.  I was expecting it to be horrible and it exceeded my expectations.  “Jack and Jill” was salvaged by Al Pacino.  It’s like Al knew he was in a horrible movie with a stupid premise but he sold it hard.

    • #14
  15. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    thelonious:There is no worse movie than “That’s My Boy.” Horrible just horrible. I was expecting it to be horrible and it exceeded my expectations. “Jack and Jill” was salvaged by Al Pacino. It’s like Al knew he was in a horrible movie with a stupid premise but he sold it hard.

    I liked That’s my boy better than Jack & Jill. I think both failed, but I don’t hate the world or the guy for it. Now, I didn’t watch the last Tarantino movie, but I saw the one before that; that seemed to me pretty insane. With Sandler, it’s not hard to figure out what he’s trying to do & to judge the merits, even if he fails. I think he’s a good sort, all in all. I think it’s not an accident he remade Mr. Deeds, I think he sees himself as doing the same work for America today that Capra did way back when.

    People who think Mr. Tarantino is smart because he talks about the movies he’s seen & people who say he pays homage or what have you–those people are losers in my book. Mr. Sandler does not need that to get a basically democratic view of what’s wrong with America & to try to show it in a funny way.

    Also, I wouldn’t blame anyone for talking about his work as if it were trash if the talk weren’t so inhuman & widespread.

    • #15
  16. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    C. U. Douglas:Titus, let me contrast your explanation with another film, Clerks 2. There’s a similar make-up in there – crude humor surrounding a film which hides a deeper premise the film maker wants to explore. In this case, Clerks 2, explores the concept of friendship between two men and the conflict of doing what you believe you’re supposed to succeed and what is better for your pursuit of happiness. The crudeness of the film is over the top, but in part because Kevin Smith seeks to portray a couple of low-middle class Jersey boys discussing pop culture, but also in part as the character Randall is trying to sabotage Dante’s plans for the future – plans that Randall believes to be poor for Dante and Dante’s personal relations. There’s a veracity to the crudeness that frequently goes over the top. And Smith at least aspires to some sort of depth of thought. And Smith at least is cognizant that he can go so far.

    I only saw the movie when it came out; I thought very little of both movies–lots of half-wit witticisms… So I’m not inclined to watch it again & see if I can see what you mean.

    As for ‘level of thought’, I’m not sure you’re thinking about things right. Poetry is basically psychology–it does not take levels of thought to notice something’s out of whack with people & laugh at it.

    • #16
  17. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    I think Mr. Sandler has identified successfully over the years lots that’s wrong with public sentiment in America, with what people are confident about or despondent about–he doesn’t have lots of midlife crisis movies, this one seems to be new, but I think he gets a lot right here as well.

    As for the That’s my boy movie, two things there are worth every penny. One is, a pretty rare show of how corrupting reality TV America is to lots of people. It’s far more truthful about human experience than the books of sociologists like Mr. Murray or Mr. Putnam.  The other is, the making fun of the uptight productive, successful, moral people–Mr. Sandler was out to show that such people–he deals in human types, not individuals…–are way too moralistic & self-important to have any understanding of the kinds of low class characters or types he so well portrays & mocks. I think he proved his point–certainly, critics failed the test, almost all of them, from moralistic conservatives to the liberals who are all about denying they’re as moralistic. As for audiences–people who think they’re better than Adam Sandler because they go to superhero blockbusters are whistling in the dark–he knows more about what’s out of whack in America than they dare admit…

    • #17
  18. C. U. Douglas Coolidge
    C. U. Douglas
    @CUDouglas

    Point of Order: Aspiring to is not the same thing as achieve. A turtle can aspire to soar like the eagle. It doesn’t mean it can get off the ground. You are correct that Smith’s work points out “something is wrong” and it’s a shame modern American society has come to a point where the observation, “the bond of friendship between to men is a unique and powerful thing worth preserving” can be considered a profound discovery.

    I will contend that it’s still a better film, primarily because it does manage to express this thought (albeit clumsily), while the thoughts with The Do-Over aren’t even fully formed. The essence is there but the delivery is so far from its landing point that we miss it entirely.

    • #18
  19. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    I’ve made fun of Mr. Tarantino up to now, but his hackery is not unique. Take The big Lebowski–people will write fake philosophy about it in respectable quarters or quote it admiringly without any sense that there’s shame in it or that it’s lowly stuff–but it’s got a hell of a lot in common with That’s my boy. It’s just that people cannot bring themselves to take a chance on diamonds in the rough while all the time falling for polished mediocrity.

    America does not produce comic genius. You could ask yourself why, but how long would it take for things to descend to partisan blame? Mr. Tarantino & the Coen Bros. are about the only successful comic poets who also have some prestige.–Add names, by the way, to the list, if you can…–But they are not capable of reaching the broadest audiences in America or do not care to do so. I think there’s a great difference between’em, but I also think there is a lot that they simply cannot do–anymore than Mr. Sandler could get Oscar-prestige or what have you…

    The popular & critical treatment of these kinds of comics is very different–not because of merit, but mostly because of self-importance. Some comics flatter important or influential parts of the audience; others, like Mr. Sandler, do not. Nobody ever tries to help them out or make them better–it’s always gotta be humiliation.

    • #19
  20. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    So I agree that Mr. Sandler mostly fails in his ambitions–at least in the last seven or so years…–but I think they’re salutary ambitions & a lot of the problem is, no one ever helped him. Had America had lots of other better comic poets, it would make no difference; were people less invested in humiliating him, it would make no difference. But the truth is, the treatment he’s received is far more scandalous than anything seen in any of his movies.

    There is always more than a little thinking that people like him shouldn’t exist to try to say what he’s trying to say. It’s especially hard to avoid this conclusion, from my perspective, when he has so little competition & the kinds of movies that are rewarded with popularity or prestige are such foolishness…

    • #20
  21. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    C. U. Douglas: … one of my favorite golf films.

    There is a phrase fraught with peril. Right up there with “best acid ska band in Sandusky.”

    • #21
  22. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    Percival:

    C. U. Douglas: … one of my favorite golf films.

    There is a phrase fraught with peril. Right up there with “best acid ska band in Sandusky.”

    That’s pretty much how I feel about Tin cup!

    • #22
  23. GLDIII Reagan
    GLDIII
    @GLDIII

    I read this movie critique out of respect for the reviewer, the inestimable Mr C.U. Douglas. His time invested in sharing what a load of crapulance that has become of the middle SNL crowd’s oeuvre save me what precious little time I have for movie viewing.

    There seem to be a real dearth of flicks that are well made and not third iteration remakes of something old, or some overwrought comic book themes, which admittedly can be at times entertaining since they seem to be stealth avenues for social moralizing, as opposed to outright propaganda. So much trash, so little time….

    Thanks C.U.D.

    • #23
  24. H. Noggin Inactive
    H. Noggin
    @HNoggin

    I wish I had read this before we wasted 20 minutes.  Then we turned it off.  It really was that bad, but to me, the worst, vilest movie I saw last year was The Kingsmen.  And they are making a sequel to that dreck?  Unbelieveable.

    • #24
  25. kylez Member
    kylez
    @kylez

    Misthiocracy:

    Titus Techera: Of course, his bad movies are not really worse than many movies that are tolerated or that are supposed to be good & become prestigious.

    You should watch the Red Letter Media review for Jack & Jill, for an illustration of how and why the Happy Madison machine can be worse than the usual H0llywood drek. Sandler’s business model takes it one step further than mere artistic bankruptcy.

    They take an ENTIRE HOUR to explore the film’s crapulence.

    I was just coming here to recommend that, seeing if anybody had. I’ve watched it twice, but have not bothered to watch the movie, nor most of his movies.

    • #25
  26. kylez Member
    kylez
    @kylez

    Misthiocracy:

    C. U. Douglas: Seriously, I look at that, and it could be a good concept.

    This is the tragedy of virtually all of Adam Sandler’s movies.

    Virtually all the terrible ones actually had really interesting premises, while the few “good” ones at the beginning of his career had really stupid premises, if you think about ’em.

    (Caveat: I do not count non-Happy Madison movies, such as Punch Drunk Love or Funny People, as true “Adam Sandler movies”. They weren’t produced by Sandler’s own movie-making machine, therefore they don’t count.)

    I haven’t seen it, and hear it was bad, but Click has what should have been a fun premise.

    • #26
  27. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    Click is pretty good. By the end, you always think–it ain’t Capra. But not much is-

    • #27
  28. DocJay Inactive
    DocJay
    @DocJay

    Dude , you are like the self abusing albino monk in Davinci Code for doing this.  Either thanks or Prozac are in order.

    • #28
  29. Amaranth Member
    Amaranth
    @Amaranth

    “Instead you just shift in your seat uncomfortably and wish it away.”

    Not me.  I liked it.  Of course, I went in fully expecting sophomoric humor and risible sight gags.  And that’s what The Do-Over delivered.  In Spades!  (heh)  I don’t know what anybody else could have been expecting from Sandler.  Caveat emptor.

    • #29
  30. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    C. U. Douglas:It’s supposed to be laughed at. Instead you just shift in your seat uncomfortably and wish it away. This movie requires a panic room you can flee to so the movie can’t hurt you (And yes, I just blatantly stole a Family Guy gag; this movie is so bad that I can do that and feel like I’m still in good taste). This movie elicited one laugh from me, and that was from when I watched the trailer. That’s it. There was one laugh and they wasted it on the trailer.

    I don’t just want my ninety minutes back: I want them back with the interest a loan shark would charge.

    so, let me get this straight – you didn’t like it?

    Adam Sandler, as far as I can tell, has made two watchable movies in his career – The Wedding Singer and 50 First Dates.

    [edit] And I’ll add in the voice work on Hotel Transylvania

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.