Features

Pentegarn · #1

I just saw it and I freaking loved it!

If you enjoyed the first one, and if it is playing in your city, this is a must see.

While the woman who played the new FBI agent (Julie Benz) is no Willem Dafoe, she did a good job and was a fun and interesting character.

I wasn't as thrilled with the Romeo character. I didn't dislike him, but as a character meant to replace Rocco, he just couldn't measure up. He was good, but not great.

10,000 Volt Ghost · #2

Is the story pretty cohesible with the first one? Do you need to see the first one to enjoy the 2nd?(Not sure if my g/f has seen the first one)

Pentegarn · #3

You kind of do because there are a lot of references to the first movie. Like the three Boston detectives are all worried they will get in trouble for how the first movie ended for example. Or how Julie Benz's character knows Agent Smeckler.

Kitsa · #4

Visually the Romeo guy reminded me of Tadao for some reason. I kept mentally referencing Tadao.

The FBI agent's accent I found annoying as hell but then again, I always hate when people put on accents for a role and it was probably just extra-distracting to me for some reason.

I also didn't like that they had to go back to the same formula (wacky, dimwitted different-ethnicity sidekick, for example). I would have liked to see more backstory on the dad.

Mainly, though, we were all, "Ricky! Hey, it's Ricky! That's Ricky!"

Tadao · #5

I've never seen either the first nor the second.

Pentegarn · #6

At least see the first, it grows hair on your chest I hear told

Tadao · #7

Isn't it just a bunch of drunk Irishmen with guns being all Catholic? I see that every March 17th.

Pentegarn · #8

Exactly!

Kitsa · #9

See the first one. It's magnificent. I still don't know how I feel about the second.

Although, both of them make me think I'm watching someone play GTA: Boston, for some reason.

Pentegarn · #10

It gets better after repeated viewings Kitsa

Tadao · #11

Watched em both today. First won was good, the 2nd just didn't do it for me.

Pentegarn · #12

I enjoyed the 2nd one, but I don't think it is for everyone, it is more of a send up of the first. Though I find it got better after I saw it a couple times.

Tadao · #13

If I hadn't of watched the first one for the first time just hours before it, I may have been left wanting more and accepted the cheesier part 2. Waaaaay too much schtick in the 2nd.

Pentegarn · #14

I was actually thinking watching them back to back like that might be detrimental to the enjoyment of the 2nd one. There was a lot of schtick in the 2nd one like you said though, I know some people were put off by that

Grislygus · #15

TADAO you're the other documentary geek around these parts; while we're on the subject of the Boondock Saints, you should watch Overnight

Tadao · #16

"A documentary on the rise and stumble of Troy Duffy, the bartender-cum-filmmaker who was swept up by Miramax's Harvey Weinstein to turn his script for The Boondock Saints into a feature film."

It'll have to get that some time, I'm almost out of time and back at the GF's.

Pentegarn · #17

Like any other documentary of that vein (like King of Kong for example) it only tells one side of the story. There are articles about how it went beyond 'creative editing' to cast Duffy in a bad light.

After all, if he were the asshole he were portrayed as in Overnight, why would the entire cast gleefully return to make a sequel with such a small budget?

Tadao · #18

Because that whole cast hasn't worked in ages?

Grislygus · #19

This movie was made by two of the guys that Duffy hilariously SHRIEKS at in the footage itself, what kind of moron would be expecting it to be unbiased?