IMDb > Legally Blonde 2: Red, White & Blonde (2003) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Legally Blonde 2: Red, White & Blonde
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 29:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 290 reviews in total 

87 out of 122 people found the following review useful:

The horror, the horror

Author: sundogg99 from Oregon, USA
11 June 2004

That a film sequel will invariably fail to meet the standards of its predecessor is nearly axiomatic. For every brilliant sequel like 'Aliens' or 'Godfather: Part II', there are dozens of painfully lame successors. This is hardly a surprise, yet it is our own unerring tendency to flock, lemming-like, to sequels that insures their continued existence. Sequels make money, and that's a bad thing.

Take 'Legally Blonde 2'. Please.

By way of defense, let me point out that it isn't all that easy to find a movie that will entertain two adults, a 15 year old boy, and a 12 year old girl. Our hopes weren't high when we rented LB2 a couple of weekends ago; however, we all agreed that we had enjoyed the original movie, or at least hadn't actively hated it. That perky little Reese Witherspoon – how can you not kinda like her, huh?

After seeing LB2, I will unreservedly credit it with one thing: it provided a rallying point for my often-scattered family. We were steadfast, united in our complete and utter loathing for this execrable movie. Beyond that questionable achievement, however, I'm not sure there's anything positive that can be said about this film.

As virtually every other reviewer on the planet has noted, the original 'Blonde' had some amusing moments, most of which were supplied by Ms. Witherspoon, who managed to inject the character of Elle Woods with a believable combination of ditziness and sweet charm. Also bolstering the original film was co-star Jennifer Coolidge, who played her dim-bulb shtick to perfection as Elle's beautician friend Paulette. Of course it was a by-the-numbers plot line as predictable as Oregon rain, but Witherspoon, et al played it lightly and for laughs and it worked.

The sequel, however, is an appalling mélange of preachiness, offensive stereotypes, and patently ludicrous plot devices. 'Legally Blonde' made points by taking a helium-weight, bubbleheaded rich girl and making her into a sympathetic character. In LB2, Elle is an annoying dipshit whose breathless naivete and hyperactive adventures are simply painful to endure.

There's no real point in enumerating all the faults of this movie. To do so would be to grant it more thought than evidently went into its creation. But I can't simply step away from one aspect of the film that I found both irritating and troubling. Viewers of the first film will no doubt remember Elle's Chihuahua, Bruiser. For reasons that are continually validated, I tend to hate cutesy cinematic animal sidekicks, and Bruiser was emphatically no exception. In LB2, however, Bruiser's sexuality becomes a repeated theme and convenient plot device. More specifically, we (and Elle) discover that Bruiser is…(wait for it)… gay.

Hilarity ensues, ad nauseum.

It's a damning testimony that 1) the writers of this movie were so desperate for script fodder that they came up with this stunningly lame idea in the first place;

2) that they play it so shamelessly for laughs; and 3) that certain plot twists depend on this fact. It's a stupid, stupid idea in a stupid, stupid movie.

Should I waste more of my time or yours decrying the utter waste of Jennifer Coolidge in this movie? What about Sally Field's humiliating role as Congresswoman Victoria Rudd? Bob Newhart's excruciating turn as the know-it-all hotel doorman cum political mentor. Finally, on a larger scale, should we discuss the massive suspension of disbelief that's required to even slightly believe a moment of this wretched film?

Nah.

Was the above review useful to you?

31 out of 38 people found the following review useful:

Jaw-droppingly awful - one of 2003's worst (*)

1/10
Author: Jason Alley (samurai1978@aol.com) from Sacramento
20 October 2003

The first "Legally Blonde", with its "ditzy girl with a heart of gold does well" storyline was basically a rip-off of "Clueless", but it wasn't bad. It had a funny central idea, more than a few solid laughs, and a really entertaining lead character. This sloppy, lamely plotted, cash-in sequel has none of those things.

Reese Witherspoon, rapidly losing any edginess she used to have, is back as Elle Woods, the pink-loving, fashion conscious lawyer. She's about to get married to her boyfriend from the last movie (played by Luke Wilson) and in trying to invite her dog's parents to the wedding (that's right, her DOG'S PARENTS - remember what I said about the movie being "lamely plotted"?), she finds out that the dog's mother is being held prisoner by a cosmetics company that is pro-animal testing.

So...Elle decides to go to Washington to take on animal testing. And I wish I was in a different theater.

What we have here is a comedy with no good jokes. Not a single one. This movie's idea of "comedy" is for Elle to find out her chihuahua is gay. And then in the very next scene, the chihuahua is wearing a studded leather vest. Sigh.

Also, it's dumb. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but there's a big difference between movies that go about being dumb in a very smart, witty way (see "Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle") and a movie like "Legally Blonde 2", which is just plain dopey. The story is idiotic, characters change their minds and motivations for no reason other than to fit into where the plot is going, and everything wraps up in a way that is nauseatingly phony.

I've pretty much given up on Reese Witherspoon. Where is the cool, edgy actress that starred in movies like "Election", "Freeway" and "American Psycho"? Abducted by Hollywood to make useless, vanilla movies like this, apparently.

I, for one, would love to see her character from "Freeway" scare the living s*** out of Elle Woods.

Was the above review useful to you?

19 out of 23 people found the following review useful:

Sucked in ways I can barely explain

1/10
Author: hannah-164 from Canada
22 January 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I had the misfortune of seeing this movie while on a wonderful trip to Greece. As the 'plot' rolled out, I sank lower and lower in my seat. I was actually embarrassed to be North American.

Consider: Elle goes on a mission to find her *dog's* parents so they can attend her wedding. No, not her dog's wedding. *Her* wedding. Now, think about that. I guess this is sort of a spoiler, except it's revealed in the first ten minutes, because it's the whole premise. Yes, that's the peak. It goes downhill from there.

I felt particularly annoyed with Reece Witherspoon. Now, she strikes me as a fairly intelligent young woman. I love most of her stuff. I enjoyed Legally Blonde I. I had high hopes. How did this happen?! Was it just about the money? Was it a bet? A dare? Dumb dumb dumb.

To be honest, I would *rather* have been attending a dog's wedding.

Was the above review useful to you?

24 out of 35 people found the following review useful:

The Most Disappointing Sequel of 2003

4/10
Author: christian123
2 June 2005

Legally Blonde 2: Red, White and Blonde is a very disappointing sequel as it fails to deliver the laughs. Elle Woods is now a rising young lawyer at a great firm, balancing a demanding a career with preparations for her wedding to the man of her dreams. But when she finds out that her beloved dog Bruiser's family members are being used as cosmetic test subjects by one of her firm's own clients, she stands up for their rights--and is promptly fired. Ms. Woods decides to go to Washington to take matters into her own hands. The plot actually had some potential, unfortunately the execution was very poor. The original wasn't an Oscar quality film, it was just a fun film to watch. The sequel isn't as fun nor is it fun in general. It was pretty much the same as the first movie and so it was a pretty pointless sequel. Reese Witherspoon returns and she does a good job but she's working with a weak script. The supporting cast isn't very good as none add much to the film. Sally Field is a very good actress but her talents are wasted. Luke Wilson's character isn't very interesting and Jennifer Coolidge tries to hard most of the time. Regina King is a new addition to the cast and she does an okay job, nothing memorable though. Missing from this sequel is Selma Blair, this doesn't matter though as her character wasn't really needed. Charles Herman-Wurmfeld replaces Robert Luketic as the director and does a very bad job. The running time is a brief 95 minutes though it feels a lot longer then that. The film felt a lot longer since the movie just wasn't funny. There were a few funny moments though most of the jokes this film delivered were, at best, small chuckles. Do a few funny moments redeem this film? No, this sequel is one of the worst sequels of 2003 and one of the worst comedies of 2003. In the end, this sequel may seem funny but I assure you it isn't. Rating 4.3/10, rent the original instead.

Was the above review useful to you?

12 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

One of the worst propaganda movies ever.

1/10
Author: Morfeus Ivanovich from Riga, Latvia
7 January 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie simply fails to achieve a level of even average at any position like plot, script, directing, acting or relevant ideas. As we observe the plain and unrealistic "Blonde crusade" to Washington to achieve another stupid and purely political goal - protecting rights of animals. Well, in some time, corrupted politicans are defeated, and blondes reign supreme, although it is hard to believe they are able to actually comprehend what they were fighting for. Acting is really below average, Reese is just plain annoying, and though she's quite talented actress, the script is so bad that her talent is in vain. So, to sum up - a very bad movie. 1/10.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

Yeah, the horror

1/10
Author: phred-13 from Switzerland
7 February 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie is so bad.. The story is so strange, there's no red line through the story. The scenes aren't credible. I'm not frequently down thumbing but when I watched this movie I was ashamed that I rent it at the DVD store. You don't believe Elle that she wants to change the law. Hausers change in her mind set is also very sudden and not credible at all. And, finally, that her dog is gay is the worst point in the movie. OK, the first part of this movie wasn't that bright either, it wasn't a smart movie but at least the story was a little credible but this one.. I cannot believe that Reese Witherspoon stands behind this movie, she even helped out as Regisseur..

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 23 people found the following review useful:

I'd rather staple my eyelids shut

1/10
Author: wildkat2001 from Pasadena, California
4 November 2003

Okay, Seriously, if there is anything you ever do for yourself ever during your existence here on earth, please I beg, I warn and plead with you... DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE EVER!!!

I really did like the first and I rented this movie with some apprehension (I had heard the bad reviews, and wanted to see it for myself)

Now I wish I could turn back the hands of time and never have rented this terrible movie.

I would rather staple my eyelids shut than to ever have to sit thru this movie again!!!

The acting is horrendous, The jokes pathetic, and Reese Witherspoon's character is even more pathetic (if possible). You will suffer beyond belief if you choose to watch this film, if you like pain, then find another means of torture - this film only leaves you unsatisfied and red, black and blue!!!

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

How Bad? Sooooooo Bad

Author: dcostolo from Hong Kong
27 October 2003

Reese Goes to Washington. We discover that, beneath a very very thin veneer of protocol, politics in DC largely functions EXACTLY like a sorority! Isn't that cool? How FUN! But how on earth will Reese figure out to puncture this veneer of propriety and protocol that prevents people from doing the right thing and allows bureacracy and EEEEEEVIL to propogate through the legislative halls of our great land? well, i don't want to spoil the whole movie for you! But guess what? The really cool and honest Legislator that Reese goes to work for? She's kind of EEEEEEVIL!

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

She Became Worse O_o

3/10
Author: 1337_Bionic from Taiwan
29 June 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The whole movie had no point; with Elle Woods looking for her dogs mom? its kinda pathetic really...and the whole graduation thing from the first movie seemed REALLY good and all and the second movie she gets fired because she's obsessed with her pooch (i like dogs, nothing bad on em). anyway the whole thing was pointless because there was no real story in the movie and it totally killed the first movie after watching the second. you can easily tell that they made the second one out of thin air. if there IS a message in the movie (standing up for oneself and using one's voice) they needed to make it clearer.

another thing was that it was all centered upon Bruiser; the dog. they should have made the subtitle after Legally Blonde: (yadda yadda) different.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Absolute crap and I even liked the first one (Warning!! Possible spoiler material)

1/10
Author: pmcclure from San Francisco, CA
26 July 2003

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

(Warning!!! Possible spoiler material in this review, although I don't think I'm really spoiling anything but FYI) This movie made me want to kill myself. I thought the emphasis on the dog was just too much and got old very quickly. The charecterization of some of the people was almost offensive (almost because I don't feel that it was done to put down any one but some of the jokes regarding sexualy orentation futher spread derogitory language/concepts about homosexuals).

I will not see any sequel of this film except for free.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 29:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history