Angels in the Endzone

Boring, mainly thanks to its copied main premise from the first film of this remake trilogy. <em>'Angels in the Endzone'</em> is a lame watch. I do appreciate the switching up of the backstory for the sporting events, but even then they don't exactly create a fresh, new plotline or anything - it's hearty, but something we've all seen before. The simple change from baseball to American football ... Read more

Boring, mainly thanks to its copied main premise from the first film of this remake trilogy. <em>'Angels in the Endzone'</em> is a lame watch. I do appreciate the switching up of the backstory for the sporting events, but even then they don't exactly create a fresh, new plotline or anything - it's hearty, but something we've all seen before. The simple change from baseball to American football isn't sufficient. The overall acting, though a big drop from the 1994 production, is actually pretty solid, even if none of the cast particularly stand tall in my memory. Christopher Lloyd is again underused, not that I blame him for not committing fully to this - the cheek to put him on the cover, by the way. Of the main, more used cast members, Paul Dooley is probably the standout. A disappointing sequel to <em>'Angels in the Outfield'</em>. Here's hoping for an improvement from <em>'Angels in the Infield'</em> - I'm an optimist!Show less