IMDb user comments for
Blues Brothers 2000 (1998) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 19:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

186 comments in total

---

35 out of 44 people found the following comment useful :-
There are much worse films than this., 6 October 2005

Author: Chris Allan from United Kingdom

It takes guts to make a sequel to a movie after 20 years, especially after the original has become a legend and the star has died since.

However this movie does a lot of things right and frankly, even if it had been perfect, some people would hate it anyway. The film suffers from not having John Belushi, but John Goodman puts in a good effort, and I for one was surprised at the quality of his singing. James Brown and Aretha Franklin reprise their guest roles. The music is not as good as the original but still better than most music in the charts these days.

The humour from the original is here but it is not as funny as the original. In fact all elements from the original are here in slightly inferior forms, with the exception of the car chase, which is better.

To be honest, it is worth seeing this film just to see how all the band has aged. i would recommend it to anyone who enjoys Blues music, though fans of the original may be disappointed

---

37 out of 52 people found the following comment useful :-
Chill, Enjoy The Miusic And Laugh, 26 February 2006

Author: ccthemovieman-1 from Lockport, NY, United States

Here's another film in which I totally go against the critics - both professional and on this board, who take themselves too seriously at times. They hated this sequel to "The Blues Brothers," but I enjoyed it very much. They need to chill a bit and realize the purpose of this film: simply a tribute to the music.

How could any fan of "blues," not like this? I mean, look at all the great performers in this film and how much better does it get to have all of them join in for a couple of jam sessions at the end? The movie sports a "Who's Who" of modern-day blues musicians and singers and also is directed by John Landis, who has directed some of the most entertaining films of the last 25 years.

Plus, it was simply a funny movie with two funny guys - Dan Akyroyd and John Goodman - and a really neat-looking little kid in J. Evan Bonifant who really makes me laugh. Just looking at this 10-year-old dancing is his Blues Brothers outfit alone is worth a number of laughs. Some of the characters in here are so outrageous they would be tough to describe. The car chases, the dances and clothing and over-the-top story all add up to two hours of lamed-brained fun. No, this isn't Shakespeare and it wasn't mean to be. It's a much nicer-edged movie than the first Blues Brothers, too. Unfortunately, too many people want "edgy" material all the time .

Not only are the characters colorful, so is the cinematography, making it both a visual and audio treat. So....just look at it as a blue concert with laughs, and, hopefully, you'll enjoy it.

---

24 out of 38 people found the following comment useful :-
NOT a sequel, but a TRIBUTE!!, 28 February 2001

Author: Dengar from United States

Contrary to popular opinion, this is not a sequel. It is supposed to be a tribute to the original. People who bash this movie without reading Aykroyd's interviews are ignorant to the intent here. This movie was originally to be a sequel back in 1981 just before Belushi died. When that happened, the idea for another adventure fell away. But after almost two decades, Aykroyd wanted to do something to revisit the classic film and pay homage to his friend and co-star Belushi, so he assembled this "Concert Movie", which is supposed to be all about THE MUSIC, not the story. The only reason a story was put in was to keep it moving from musical number to musical number, because everyone knows that straight concert films are pretty boring, even if you really like the performer(s). So here it is, for the true Blues Brothers fans to enjoy. P.S.-And if your problem with the plot was some of the cartoony style actions that occur (Cabel being pulled heavenward and his clothes magically "changing", et cetera), remember that the original had the same things. In the first one the entire band's clothing "magically" changes for a concert, but if you know that this is merely a representation of the character's psychological state and not a literal change, then the film works much better. The same idea works for the much-maligned "zombie" sequence near the end at Queen Mousette's mansion. Also, people complain about the Bluesmobile in this film being able to drive underwater. Well, in the first film the car flew, performed flips, and was nearly indestructible. In fact, if you watch the DVD of the first film, you find in the deleted scenes and "Making-of" section that the Bluesmobile is supposed to be "magic", because it was parked each night inside a power transformer. How is that for cheesiness on the first film? So that also explains Elwood's ability to smuggle himself in the dash of the car in this one, and the car being able to crash land from a fiery loop-de-loop at the fairgrounds. Even though I wish this film could have been a little edgier and darker in tone like the original, I do find its bold and effective use of color to be magnificent and fascinating. Perhaps this film has a little more depth than people expect, so they incorrectly perceive it to be a lackluster and shallow mindnumbing entertainment. I know better ....... Remove the stars in the address to e-mail me.

---

11 out of 14 people found the following comment useful :-
Meant to be a Tribute Movie, but it's just a sequel, 16 February 2006

Author: mjw2305 from England

Blues Brothers 2000 is a movie with good intentions, Aykroyd and Landis once again team up to recapture the magic in tribute to John Belushi, and almost all of the original cast are still here. Musically the magic is still there and without a doubt this film is all about the music, but the original Blues Brothers film was about so much more.

Blues Brothers 2000 like the first film has very little plot, and that didn't matter the first time around, but this time; without the comedy, the lack of plot is all too apparent. I just didn't find this film funny, with a few rehashed gags and some new ones that didn't work Blue Brothers 2000 really does struggle to entertain.

John Goodman doesn't try and replace John Belushi, and he actually does a good job in poor role, but the introduction of a kid to the Blues Brothers Band seemed completely pointless and adds absolutely nothing to the film.

The saving grace is the music, with Eric Clapton, BB King, Aretha Franklin, James Brown, etc. and the original Blues Brothers Band, the music is damn good, but this alone is not enough.

Thanks for trying, but must try harder. 5/10

---

16 out of 24 people found the following comment useful :-
Great music, but where's John Belushi?, 4 April 2001
Author: (omar@mint.net) from Winslow, Maine

I have to admit that some parts of this movie were clever indeed. It was cool that they tied in the deaths of John Belushi and Cab Calloway into the movie's plot, making the characters they played dead as well. If Jim Belushi took the part of Joliet Jake, that would have been a disaster. Still, the plot of this movie could have used some serious work. For instance, in the original movie, the Blues Brothers (a) were actually brothers and (b) were on an actual "mission from God". Their goal was to make some honest money to save an orphanage from shutting down, while trying to flee from the police at the same time. The movie brought back blues legends such as Aretha Franklin and James Brown back into the spotlight, and it helped contribute to the death of disco. Eighteen years later, Jake's dead, Cab Calloway's dead, the orphanage has been shut down, so why are they being chased by the police? Because a half brother of Elwood got p***ed off at finding his real past? The kid, I must add, was a nice touch, and it was cool to see twice as many blues legends in this movie, including some new artists like Johnny Lang and Erykah Badu. But there should have been a better plot, because it seemed as though the Blues Brothers Band were going from event to event for the hell of it. Where's the plot in that? Police, leave these guys alone. The big mistake in this movie was its attempt to outdo the original movie. The music was great, and I highly recommend buying the soundtrack. However, don't expect to see a plot in this story. Otherwise, enjoy.

---

9 out of 12 people found the following comment useful :-
Bleh, 8 May 1999
Author: ChocboMg from USA

I loved the original, what happened here?? Total rehashes, the car chases sucked. The music was bad. Goodman replacing Belushi? That makes me want to spit. Where are the awesome chases, the comedy, the awesome music? Arg, this is awful, I had to fastforward a ton of boring songs. Horrible movie, do not watch it. Rated PG13 for language and should be fine for anyone. Gets a 2/10 on my scale.

---

5 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
Astounding music and car chases, 9 July 2008

Author: Bobo from Canada

The only way this film can not be awe inspiring is if you watch it on a 10" black and white TV with a 4 watt sound system. Maybe that's a bit extreme, but I watched this on a 70" projection screen and 7.2 pristine and precise surround sound. I have seen this film at least 20 times and get the same pleasure from it each time. Aretha Franklin's voice and the musical abilities of almost the entire cast would carry any film, but this one doesn't need it. The story might not be completely developed (euphemism) but the Russian mobsters and GI Joes scenes are gutbustingly funny. Also, for anyone who has ever listened to "modern" music and wondered where the world was going to, Dan Akroyd's motivational speech is something to behold. Although I never expected to say this, because I'm a non-religious person, the gospel choir's rendition of "John the Revelator" sends shivers down your spine. I love this film, and would recommend it to anyone who likes good music.

---

4 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
Aside from everything..., 10 April 2007

Author: jayford89 from United States

Aside from everything, like Dan Aykroyd's dwindling ability to write a compelling story with good dialog, the ridiculous "say whaaa" parts, and Elwood's complete change in character, what grinds my gears the very most, is the poster, it was advertised "Aykroyd, Goodman: They're back in blue" completely disregarding the existence of the great John Belushi.....

plus the movie sucked major balls if not for the music, and the kid's dance skills, i couldn't watch it....

so very sad, and unfair!

OHHH SCHNICKELFRITZ!

---

7 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-
Music, Music, 4 October 1999

Author: krukow from Oakland, California

Who cares about the plot? There wasn't one. The best thing about this movie is the top notch music and performers. Having all those folks in one film is incredible. A hundred years from now, this film would be a great case study of the R & B, Soul, and Blues of this time. And this tease.stay after the final credits, and you will be greatly rewarded. For this type of film I wish there was 2 scoring systems, one for the plot and the other for the music.

---

10 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :-
Missing Something Very Important, 10 January 2000

Author: Jonathan Parshall (JonathanDParshall) from Brevard, North Carolina, USA

I love the 1980 film "The Blues Brothers". In fact, it may be my favorite movie of all time. I like it for three main reasons, descending: 1. The fantasic, fanciful car chases. 2. The great music (I have a copy of the soundtrack). 3. The great deadpan acting of both Aykroyd and Belushi. Now, if the new movie didn't have half of 3 and a not really good 2, I could forgive them. But what the heck happened to 1? I sat through the entire movie thinking "Okay, it's really bad now, but I have the great ending chase to look forward to." It was one of the worst disappointments ever when Elwood and that stupid kid just drove off and the credits roll. What goes on? The chases that were in it were short and (in the case of massive multi-cop car crash scene that takes forever) dumb. A total falure on everyone and everything's part.

---

---

Page 1 of 19:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Amazon.com summary	Ratings
Awards	Newsgroup reviews	External reviews
Parents Guide	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user comments	Your vote history