As a big fan of the first one, I had high hopes for the second. It was good, but not amazing. It's a sequel, so it should be judged based on that fact. If it were a standalone movie, it would fail.
First, the good. Impressively, though the sequel took years to come about, Duffy managed to maintain the entire cast of the first movie that went miles for maintaining the plot. The story of the sequel was decently believable and the actions scenes were fantastic and arguably, better than in the first. Overall, the movie was enjoyable and a successful sequel.
Now, the bad. If you liked the first one, you'll most likely like the second one. Alone this isn't a bad thing, but the reason is still a problem. The reason? It's as if they took a survey of what people liked about the first one and increased it by 200% in the second installment. For example, if you liked the church-themed music, zany sidekick, Rocko, and slapstick, over-acting in the supporting cast, well, you'll get plenty of each. If you like those aspects and wanted more, a lot more, of each, you'll be pleased. For me, too much of a good thing is not a great thing.
The church-themed music of the first flick was great and overall not distracting from the original. This is not the case in the second. One can look forward to church bells, club-thumping base and even one song ending now, surely trademarked, "Spirtu Sancti." Again, subjective as any review may be, the side-kick Rocko was completely fitting in the original, but his replacement in the sequel was distracting at best and idiotic and stereotypical at worst (most of the time).
Lastly, as I mentioned earlier, the supporting cast was maintained: both a pro and a con. The downside here is that they seemed to have spent the subsequent years following the original movie, honing their skills of over-acting. I'll not argue that that isn't what made the characters in the first movie colorful and endearing, but again, at 200% of the first movie, it's annoying, distracting and leads to several eyebrow furling moments and incredulous "You gotta be kidding me" looks from the viewers.
Towards the end of the movie, there is a masculinity-affirming cut scene whose tie to the movie is tenuous. This scene, like many other aspects of the movie, may be entertaining by themselves, but distracting from the movie as a whole.
Overall, the movie was good, no not great, but good. I'd watch it again, and will. But I sincerely hope the blu-ray release does something to address the blood packet vests used for special effects that make several outlined appearances through t-shirts during the gun fights.
First, the good. Impressively, though the sequel took years to come about, Duffy managed to maintain the entire cast of the first movie that went miles for maintaining the plot. The story of the sequel was decently believable and the actions scenes were fantastic and arguably, better than in the first. Overall, the movie was enjoyable and a successful sequel.
Now, the bad. If you liked the first one, you'll most likely like the second one. Alone this isn't a bad thing, but the reason is still a problem. The reason? It's as if they took a survey of what people liked about the first one and increased it by 200% in the second installment. For example, if you liked the church-themed music, zany sidekick, Rocko, and slapstick, over-acting in the supporting cast, well, you'll get plenty of each. If you like those aspects and wanted more, a lot more, of each, you'll be pleased. For me, too much of a good thing is not a great thing.
The church-themed music of the first flick was great and overall not distracting from the original. This is not the case in the second. One can look forward to church bells, club-thumping base and even one song ending now, surely trademarked, "Spirtu Sancti." Again, subjective as any review may be, the side-kick Rocko was completely fitting in the original, but his replacement in the sequel was distracting at best and idiotic and stereotypical at worst (most of the time).
Lastly, as I mentioned earlier, the supporting cast was maintained: both a pro and a con. The downside here is that they seemed to have spent the subsequent years following the original movie, honing their skills of over-acting. I'll not argue that that isn't what made the characters in the first movie colorful and endearing, but again, at 200% of the first movie, it's annoying, distracting and leads to several eyebrow furling moments and incredulous "You gotta be kidding me" looks from the viewers.
Towards the end of the movie, there is a masculinity-affirming cut scene whose tie to the movie is tenuous. This scene, like many other aspects of the movie, may be entertaining by themselves, but distracting from the movie as a whole.
Overall, the movie was good, no not great, but good. I'd watch it again, and will. But I sincerely hope the blu-ray release does something to address the blood packet vests used for special effects that make several outlined appearances through t-shirts during the gun fights.