Hotel Transylvania. I was recently invited to go see this movie with someone else who, henceforth, is no longer allowed to pick the movies.
Basically, the story goes like this. Monsters do exist, but far from being murderous hellspawn out to destroy the world they really just want to be left alone. The infamous lord of the vampires, Count Dracula, spends all of his vast fortune to build Hotel Transylvania, a secluded castle where monsters can go to hang out and have fun without humans chasing after them with pitchforks and torches.
In the middle of all of this is his daughter, Mavis Dracula (more on that god-awful name later), a stereotypically rebellious teenager who wants to go out and explore the world, much to the chagrin of her stereotypically uptight father who wants to keep his baby safe at home. Eventually he relents and lets her go out into the world, but then orchestrates a fake torch-wielding mob attack to bring her back home. This, unfortunately has the side effect of bringing a stereotypically obnoxious human boy to the hotel. Mavis stereotypically falls in love with him, her dad stereotypically tries to break them apart, and we all get clichéd all the way to stereotypesville before ending with a really horrible musical number about zinging, and no not the kind of "zing" where you burn someone with a cutting joke, but the "love at first sight" kind of zing. ...more on that later, too.
Where to start? Well, I promised I'd say more about Mavis' name, so why not there? So, do I even need to bring up that Mavis isn't even remotely a slavic name and therefore doesn't make any sense for the character, or that technically her name should be Mavis Tepes if she's really count Dracula's daughter? I really hope not because if you don't get why that's bad then it's going to be really difficult to explain why referring to Frankenstein's Creature as a "Stein monster" named "Frank" is also stupid.
That brings me to another point. The premise of getting together all the popular movie monsters - Frankenstein's Creature, the Wolfman, the Mummy, and so on - and showing things from their perspective could be really awesome. If done right, it could deconstruct the characters and the very concept of monster movies. It is not done right here. At best the jokes they make about these characters are lazy as Hell, at worst they get the characters completely wrong, like with the hotel's head chef, Quasimodo, who...wait, Quasimodo? As in the Hunchback of Notre Dame? Not only is he not a quintessential movie monster, he's not even a monster! He's just an ugly guy with a messed up back! What's next, a pair of fleas who speak with high pitched voices? Wait, they did that too? WHAT THE HELL?!
KR Rating:  HORRIBLE
So yeah, this movie didn't do anything right, and it's not even like they were trying. I saw absolutely every plot twist and joke coming because there's literally not one single thing that happens in this movie that isn't a cliché, and they can't even claim it was supposed to be satirical because every one of those god-awful clichés is played completely straight.
The movie didn't even have a worthwhile message to put across. The moral of the story (or "theme" for you lit nerds out there) is true love at first sight, feeling the "zing" with your special someone, how you only "zing" once in your life, and honestly I don't even have to explain it because it's been in so many stupid movies. Okay, let's be completely honest here. How many people reading this have been in love before? Okay, now think back to the first person you ever loved, the first person you ever felt like you really connected to...now think about how much your life would totally suck if that person was the only person you would ever, could ever love, and that you had to spend the rest of your life with that person.
Okay, so maybe it's not like that for you. Maybe you got lucky and managed to find your perfect match on the first try. If so, good for you and I hate your guts. For the rest of us, let's just take a moment to be really glad that this particular trope is complete garbage, shall we?
Ah...that does feel better.
I don't hate Adam Sandler. Everything I've heard about the man says he's one of the nicest guys in Hollywood and I do enjoy some of his movies. Hell, I know everyone on the net hates Eight Crazy Nights but I didn't even really mind that one, and while this movie was really bad I do have to admit Sandler's version of Dracula wasn't terrible and might have been one of the movie's few good points.
That said, it's time to admit something: Adam Sandler has never been in anything that can be called really good. Even Billy Madison, arguably his best movie, becomes seriously stupid and bad if you think about it too hard, especially when you realize it's basically the same movie as Happy Gilmore, Water Boy, and Big Daddy which also really suck if you think about them too hard.
I guess what I'm saying is that thinking about Adam Sandler is a bad idea.