The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
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
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 5 of 19: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]
Index 189 reviews in total 

not cool enough to be good

Author: SnoopyStyle
24 April 2015

The MacManus brothers (Sean Patrick Flanery, Norman Reedus) are with their father (Billy Connolly) in an isolated farm in Ireland. A priest in Boston has been killed in a church using their style. The brothers dig up their other life and return to Boston to avenge the killing. FBI SPECIAL Agent Eunice Bloom (Julie Benz) takes over the investigation from the incompetent local cops. On the freighter to America, the brothers are joined by Mexican fighter Romeo (Clifton Collins Jr.). Concezio Yakavetta (Judd Nelson) has taken over the gang after his father's killing by the MacManus.

The over-stylized mannerisms are interesting for a little while. However it becomes more of a distraction. It's not compelling enough to be interesting. It's not cool enough to be good. Julie Benz's accent gets a bit annoying. Billy Connolly only has a short cameo and the boys don't have his charisma. Everything is a little bit annoying like Judd Nelson and the movie is a messy mix.

Was the above review useful to you?

Hell's Angels of Death...

Author: poe426 from USA
2 March 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

THE GODFATHER gave birth to THE GODFATHER II; THE BOONDOCK SAINTS begat THE BOONDOCK SAINTS II: ALL SAINTS DAY; need more be said? Troy Duffy has given us more of the character-driven carnage that made the original such an original: there's John Woo-style action aplenty; a mini-murderer with a Napoleon complex; Clifton Collins as a redneck Mexicutioner; a cameo by Willem Dafoe; and Peter Fonda in an incredible (if brief) performance as "the Roman." There are great lines throughout: Billy Connolly laments that the only problem with making it look like a priest died at the hands of The Boondock Saints "was... it worked." (Because the ploy backfires and the Saints come "back with a vengeance.") Julie Benz as Detective Eunice Bloom says she's there to "capture the men responsible for the murder of 22 of Boston's finest criminals." "You better find your Inner Gangster," the Don orders his capos. I could go on, but my point has been made: THE BOONDOCK SAINTS II: ALL SAINTS DAY is as funny and original as the first film. I can't wait to see the next one.

Was the above review useful to you?

Don't do it. Don't watch it. Walk away. This movie never happened.

Author: Hans Miniar Jónsson from Iceland
10 December 2014

Or rather, I wish it never happened. I mean, the first one was brilliant... or at least "good". The Boondock Saints is witty, entertaining, clever, good fun, and while it has some stereotypes and tropes it doesn't appear to go out of it's way to be prejudiced drivel.

This... is nothing like that movie.

All Saints Day feels like two hyper-testosterone boys, desperate to be "REAL MEN", with no cinematic experience that didn't involve loony toons, got together and wrote a shitty fanfic based on the first movie, and someone read it and thought to themselves that this was a great way to try and build a franchise.

The amount of "no homo" and slapstick in this pile of drivel is hideous. And the dream vision of how to be REAL MEN(tm) just takes the f-ing cake.

Only saving grace in the whole movie is... well... there isn't one.

If you enjoyed the Boondock Saints, walk away, this never happened.

Was the above review useful to you?

Botox Saints . . .

Author: lrahon from New Orleans
5 November 2014

This is horrible. Besides SPF's face being all swollen. I thought the bad direction and direction of photography just make it painful to watch. That's besides the horrible dialog, relentless, rambling, uninteresting plot and unlikeable characters.

I came on this site to see who directed the photography so badly, and I see no one. Looks like the writer and his brother just skipped that position all together, among others, and directed themselves.

You can tell. If they hired really good directors, someone who could make it more cartoony, like the script, they might have redeemed this. But it's painful to watch the way it is. Who the heck are all these characters?

God it just goes on and on. We're just watching it like a train wreck at this point.

Directors earn their pay. Next time hire some.

Was the above review useful to you?

Not only weak, but annoying too

Author: Adam Peters from Birkenhead United Kingdom
3 September 2014

(19%) I haven't seen the first, and I'm not too sure if I want to after watching this. Main issue here is that they tried to cover up the crap plot with a thick helping of overblown garbage that stinks up all the movie's problems resulting in them if anything being highlighted and more clear. The two leads are an insult to 2D poorly fleshed comicbook characters, and the strong desire to be cool comes across as forced and annoying. The performances at times are acceptable for this type of thing, but the script is hampered by clueless dialogue and lackluster plot structure. Also, how many times can these Irish Jules from Pulp Fiction wannabes fire without reloading? Because I didn't know handguns had 2000 bullet capacity sized clips.

Was the above review useful to you?


Author: Kieron Moore from England
5 May 2014

There are simply two reasons why I chose to view this film. 1) I heard that the original, and the sequel, profit off the same formula and obvious similarities of those well-loved crime movies, such as 'Pulp Fiction'. And 2) I wanted to see if Norman Reedus could actually act outside of his character in 'The Walking Dead'... which he can't.

I can't vouch for the original (which I haven't seen yet, but intend to) but this film is just messy. I was on board for literally a few minutes on account of the melodramatic and comical introduction to the brothers, but quickly lost interest.

The main downside is that this film tries to be funny throughout, but it clearly is not. In actual fact the 'funniest' character is that 'kinda' Mexican guy who chooses to help out the brothers. Other than that the characters, especially the detectives, are some of the most boring characters to ever hit the screen. Watch only if you are open- minded, that's the only way that you will have fun with this.

Was the above review useful to you?

Slightly off the mark sequel to a cult classic.

Author: PopCulturedwithMovieMike from United States
29 January 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The Boondock Saints are back, and boy does it feel familiar...a little too familiar.

If you are a die hard fan of the first film, then you will love the second film. If you hated the first film or haven't seen it yet, then stay away from All Saints Day.

The Boondock Saints II seems to exist only as a love letter to fans of the first. That's okay for most people, but I've been looking forward to the sequel for so long I was expecting a little more than we got.

There are a lot of rehashed jokes and bits in the longawaited sequel. Some of it works, a lot of it doesn't. I also think Duffy tried too hard to stuff all the ideas he had for the second film into the script. By doing so, it ends up feeling like a disjointed, hurried mess.

The best part of the film is just seeing the brothers back in action. Some of the action sequences are shot perfectly and really bring out the flavor of the first film.

We also get a little back-story for Billy Connolly that explains how he got in the business of killing. Although it's shot and acted well, it ends up feeling out of place in the film.

Another annoying part of the film is the 3 stooges, I mean cops. They get so much screen time you might think it's their film. There's also a lot of cheesy dialogue here and the character of the new detective didn't really work for me.

I know the review sounds like I should have given it a rotten rating, but I gave it a 70% because of the trip down memory lane.

There's just enough of our old friends that make it worth it. And when the bullets start flying and the brothers start praying, you realize why you feel in love with them in the first place.

Was the above review useful to you?


Author: neil-upto11 from UK
9 January 2014

Not a shred of the original charm remains. It's an animated corpse of a film. Talking of which, what the devil happened to Sean Patrick's face?! Between his plastic surgery and moronic ranting he looks vaguely sub-human.

Basically, scenes from the original 'Boondock Saints' are remade into stilted, feeble replicas. It's witless, poorly written and desperate.

If you loved the original (and I did) please do yourself a favour, resist the temptation and avoid this mess. At least that way, the magic of the first film will remain untarnished in your memory!

(Imdb want more lines, so Im padding.)

Was the above review useful to you?

more stupid then part 1

Author: trashgang from Midian
20 December 2013

I still can't understand why for so many people this one is a must see. I have seen the first one and I wasn't that happy with the result. Here it's just the same as part 1 except that this time it's a bit exaggerated.

It's the part of Special Agent Eunice Bloom (Julie Benz) that I didn't like at all. Normally I don't have any problems with Julie but this time she's going over the top. And it tears this flick seriously down. I can't say anything more then if you have liked the first entry you surely will like this part. It's just a copy of that one. But by copying part 1 there's nothing new to found except that it becomes a bit more ridiculous in some ways on part of the so-called humour added now that a Mexican (Clifton Collins Jr.) is helping out the saints. In the first entry Rocco was taken seriously but here it's just one big joke with cheesy situations. No, for me this isn't a cult flick or a must see. Very disappointed by the Boondock Saints.

Gore 1/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 2/5 Story 2/5 Comedy 0/5

Was the above review useful to you?

A Poor Clone of the Original

Author: PlugInYourBrain from Australia
17 August 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

First-time Film Maker Troy Duffy had ten years to learn from his mistakes in the original "Boondock Saints." He's incredibly lucky to get a second chance at it, but its a lost opportunity.

There are two good one-liners in the movie. The rest of the dialog is atrocious: "I'm so smart I make smart people feel retarded." The Humour just isn't funny: One of the FBI Agents is called Kuntsler, so they call him "Kunty". If these have you in stitches, then this could be the movie for you.

The story is incoherent. A lot of gangsters get shot, but they're so poorly defined and you can't keep track of who they are or even what it's all about. This was a flaw in the original, and you would have thought in the ten years since Duffy might have thought about it and corrected it. No such luck.

There is no tension. Unlike the first movie, this one is played as a tongue-in-cheek comedy, complete with a stereotypical Mexican for comedy relief. There are a few friendly deaths along the way perhaps to remind us this is "serious business," but they don't register amongst the slapstick.

Apart from the fact he's played by Billy Connelly, there is nothing endearing about the character of Il Duce. His death is paint-by-numbers film making that doesn't carry the gravitas that Rocco's death did in the original. It is as if Duffy tries to imitate the original film without being quite sure how how he - or they - did it first time round.

In the first film despite his hubris and inexperience Duffy was able to turn in a relatively entertaining movie. One of the questions the documentary "Overnight" failed to answer was: Is Duffy a natural-born film maker, or did the original film's financiers parachute in a experienced production team to run the production him? The poor quality of this sequel suggests it was the latter.

Duffy had a good seminal idea for the original film, but that was it. There was so much wasted potential here.

Even casting the twins as sheep farmers at the beginning is lame, when we could have begun with them on the run after ten years dishing out justice - just as they promised they would be doing at the end of the first movie.

Peter Fonda who has a small cameo at the end is extremely good. Julie Benz provides some nice eye candy. Many have criticized her over-the-top accent and cowgirl outfit, but given the cornball tone of the movie what were they expecting? Benz is a capable actress doing what Duffy told her to do.

There's not much to enjoy here: The slow motion gun fights don't have the freshness they had in the original. That one of the twins now looks a bit on the fat side doesn't help. The bad guys running with pistols on a big estate look unconvincing. Apart from one shot with Peter Fonda at the end, the cinematography was pedestrian. Only the most dedicated fans could enjoy this movie. I am a fan of the original, but not this sequel.

An hour in I found myself wishing the movie was about to end. That's never a good sign: 4 / 10.

Suggest you watch "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels" instead.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 5 of 19: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

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