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 6 of 30: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [Next]
Index 293 reviews in total 

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Legally stupid.

4/10
Author: kidpainin from The Sunshine State.
12 November 2003

Lackluster follow up to Legally Blonde finds our hero trying to save Buster's (Her dog) Family from being experimented on. So she goes to the capital to fight the good fight for tasted and class, and to change the system as well. It lacks the charm and feistiness of the original, and basically retreads the original plot of the first film in every scene. It's a decent rental thanks to Reese Witherspoon but it needed more to hold its own with the original.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

As bad as the first one is good.

2/10
Author: TimAyers from Arizona, United States
8 November 2003

It took Jurassic Park two sequels to get this bad. They used the same story line, but made it unbelievable. Used the same jokes and gags, but made them cornier and cheesier, detrimentally. Had excellent supporting actors and didn't use them effectively. It's a horrible disappointment and torture to watch.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

So bad I couldn't finish it!

Author: Dave from U.S.
7 November 2003

After about 45 minutes of zero comedy and animal rights crap, we pulled the plug on this piece of garbage. What a disappointment! Don't be suckered into renting this joke of a movie and if someone wants to lend you their copy, refuse it! Your time would be better spent hammering nails into your kneecaps. This movie(?) gets zero stars, in fact if it were possible to be less then zero, this piece of crap would qualify.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Is this film even legal?

Author: bigben-3 from Los Angeles, CA
1 November 2003

Oh, I was very disappointed after watching this film. This movie has yet to be another victim of the "sequel" curse. What happened??

I loved the first part. Good story line, terrific humor, and Reese Witherspoon is such a talented actress. Legally Blond, was a very funny, sweet film. The sequel however is such a disappointment. Reese's character totally lost her touch in this film. I'm not even impress anymore. I'm sorry, but her character portrayed on how really dumb the blonds are, not to mention quite very annoying. I really thought this film would be funnier as the first one, but clearly I was wrong. This film is a waste of time and money. Might contain some funny highlights but overall tasteless and boring.

Go watch this film on video.

3 stars out of 10.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

1 1/2 Hours of my life I am not getting back

1/10
Author: steve-1179 from Melbourne, Australia
16 September 2003

What can I say,

After a great first movie, yet another bad sequel put out there just to make money.

The story goes nowhere, is completely unrealistic and doesn;t even make itself seem possible witin the confines of the movie. Somehow all the characters have suddenly had their IQ reduced since the first film.

I could go on and on about how bad this movie really is, actually no I can't because it's really forgettable.

Well it goes down with Matrix and being one of those films that we will just pretend never had a sequel.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Another "They should've stopped with only one" sequel

Author: Indogirl from Earth
10 September 2003

Anyone watching this movie can tell it is was only made to capitalize on the money made by the first one (which was pretty good)! Acting is bad. Way too unbelievable. The jokes fell flat because they tried too hard to be ditzy again, etc. What happened to Paulette??? She really got ditzier. Overall, I thought the characters weren't as believable, likeable or even acting well! My favorite character is played by Luke Wilson and he wasn't in there very much.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

an insult to my consciousness

1/10
Author: lukester_71 from United States
6 September 2003

Yuck--this was the worst sequel in the worst way. This movie was an insult to my consciousness. Everyone to whom I spoke about this movie said it was "cute." What's wrong with admitting that you saw it and hated it--save a few people from the pain of watching every tightly contrived and trite scene drag on before their eyes and pierce their ears. As much as I love Reese Witherspoon--I hated this movie.

By the way, I loved the first one.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

The Blonde Goes Bland

Author: nadger_09
4 September 2003

Suppose someone tells you a story that has a shallow plot and you liked it not because of the story itself but rather because it was fresh and something you have never heard of. Now suppose that someone comes again later and says he has something to tell you again and he does and you realize that while the characters and settings have been slightly altered, it is basically the first story he told you. You would think that this guy was so impressed with his first story that he based a new one on it.

This is what it's all about. "Legally Blonde 2" starts where the first one left off: Elle Woods (Reese Witherspoon) is now working full-time at a top law firm and is just about to marry the man of her life - Emmett (Luke Wilson). However, after learning that the mother of Bruiser, her ever-faithful chihuahua, is held captive as a test subject to the latest brands of cosmetics, Elle brings the case to her law firm which consequently fires her. Deciding to take matters into her own hands she decides to go to Washington to set on passing a bill on banning testing cosmetics on animals.

I've always thought Reese Witherspoon as an excellent actress, and I did like her enough in "Sweet Home Alabama" to save the film from its ditzy premise. But her onscreen cutesiness alone can't save this one from the jinx that sequels often have to suffer. The originality that was used in its predecessor was, well, all used up and we're left with nothing but what seem to be jokes and scenes that were edited out from the first film. This is definitely one chick movie with no attitude and falls flat. While the original movie worked because of its inventive approach which also helped Reese Witherspoon gain her "next Meg Ryan" tag, "Legally Blonde 2" on the other hand feels very much as forced as an obligatory sequel due to the commercial success of the first film. And what's next? "Legally Blonde 3: The Blonde House"?

Oh, puh-leeze.

Grade: D+

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Awful, Awful, Awful

1/10
Author: smfarnsworth from Manchester, England
29 August 2003

I didn't see LB1 but my girlfriend ensured me that it was good and so we ventured to the cinema to see LB2. Oh.... My.... GOD. It was puerile drivel. I've just read in disbelief reviewers comments who actually thought it wasn't too bad..!!!

Please, if you do nothing else with your life, save yourself £5 and 2-hours and do not consider viewing this movie. It is so bad in fact that I would advise you not to watch when it comes on TV.

Not since Almost an Angel with Paul Hogan have I wanted to leave a cinema. I only stayed as it was raining outside....

0/10 - and only because that's the lowest I can register

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

The pain, the shininess!

Author: Super Goji-San (ash_ketchum09@hotmail.com) from wemyss bay, scotland, earth
14 August 2003

This film caused such illness and pain to me that I nearly left half-way through. Unfortunately I stayed to the end and saw something so spastic, terribly designed, written, directed, acted. The whole film fails in every single department because the cast are more into advertising lip gloss than making a film. I kinda liked the first film but unfortunately not anymore due to this filthy piece of excrement. The plot runs something like this. Elle decides to go to Washington to ban animal testing (Which normally I'd support) but because her only reason for doing this is to get Bruiser (Her ugly dog's mother) free it kind of falls flat. What follows is a mixture of tasteless jokes, zero acting and a blonde Sally Field who I'm sure was embarrased to do this film.

Avoid at all costs.

0/10

PS: The dog is gay, that tells you all you need to know about this film

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 6 of 30: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [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