Eric
07-22-2010, 03:32 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4e/Boondock_2_poster.JPG
The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day
I imagine there will be one person reading this review with a smirk on his face. So I guess something good will come from this mess of a movie.
10 years ago I saw the original "Boondock Saints" and loved it (hard to believe, isn't it!). My kind of movie. A movie about justified vengeance, retribution, good vs. evil, striking down the wicked, etc. Back then the action sequences were stylish; bullet-time and slow motion hadn't been done to death and the storytelling in the Tarantino-style was still fresh. I thought it was unique, creative, and entertaining without being overly pretentious. Since then this storytelling style has been overused. Now, slow motion action sequences, gruesome violence and 50+ f-bombs are the norm. You watch the original "Boondock Saints" today and you'll enjoy it, but not as much because we've become numb to what made us (some of us anyway ;) ) love the original.
When I first heard about the sequel I had mixed emotions. Part of me was excited, since I was such a big fan of the original. Part of me was not, because most of the time a sequel fails to live up to the original (name 5 sequels that are better than the original..."Empire Strikes Back"..."Aliens"..."T2"..."Toy Story 2?"). Sequels are generally cash grabs, and for an underground success like this, a sequel is not a good idea unless it's going big budget and even then it rarely works. Plus, why did they need a sequel? The original had a very clear beginning, middle and end. No question marks, no underdeveloped characters, no remaining bad guys...
You can always tell someone's "life's work". That one thing that they worked on for 10+ years, writing, re-writing, showing to friends and family, adjusting, revising, saving all their money to finance, finally getting their big break and releasing their pride and joy. You can see that it's something that they are completely proud of and have put a lot of work into. Look at the music industry. When someone's first album comes out a lot of times it's often incredible, with a bunch of really good songs, because they've been working on that 1 album for years and years. Then they are successful and the "sophomore slump" hits because it's a mass-produced cash grab that's written, recorded & released in a fraction of the time the first one was released.
To me the original felt like Troy Duffy's "life's work". I know the guy was an egotistical tool and made many mistakes, but the movie itself had the shine and polish of something that he was proud of. Every line, every scene, I'm sure he loves. No regrets, nothing he wants to change, it's his finished product. (I'm sure there are parts of the original that aren't perfect, but you get what I'm saying.)
And then there's the sequel.
/sigh
I think the best way to describe my feelings on the sequel is this: it's a damn shame.
This movie could have been great. It really could have. But it wasn't. It was just plain terrible. And for me, a huge BDS fanboi--I've been playing characters named "Boondock" for 10 years now (CS & WoW)--, it was honestly one of the most painful movie watching experiences of my life. I wanted to like it, I wanted it to be good, I kept waiting for it to get better. You know how forgiving I am with movies, I even gave "The Phantom Menace" 5 stars because I'm such a fanboy! I was ready to forgive this movie for almost everything, but I just couldn't.
And here's why:
(seriously, if you haven't seen it don't read this because I give a lot away)
This was the most pretentious movie I've ever seen...it was basically saying, "you should accept and like everything because it's got 'Boondock' and 'Saints' in the title." It felt like they didn't even work all that hard at being good, it was just a foregone conclusion that it would be a success like the original.
First things first, the main character, Connor (Sean Patrick Flanery) has had such terrible plastic surgery over the last 10 years that it is embarrassing. I was more distracted and bothered by that almost more than anything else in this film. Not to sound overly gay, but he made the first movie, and his acting and facial expressions were great. Okay that sounded a little gay, but I hope you know what I mean...and if you've seen this movie you know exactly what I'm talking about. He looks like a totally different person. To the point where people thought he was replaced when the movie trailers came out. You know it's bad when Norman Reedus looks good compared to your messed up face. Google search for "Sean Patrick Flanery Plastic Surgery (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=sean+patrick+flanery+plastic+surgery&aq=2&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=sean+patric&gs_rfai=CxvAjZZlITIbEFYzEiQOP4fjFCQAAAKoEBU_Q7JWd)" = lots of results) Damn shame.
So let's talk about the characters. I think it's important to mention that Rocco was loud, obnoxious but quite awesome in the first one. Great sidekick, had a good backstory, was used very well as a supplemental character in the story, and you felt a connection to him, felt the connection between him and the brothers and felt a sense of loss when he died. He's replaced by Romeo, this terribly stereotypical Mexican guy who is replacing Rocco but without any of the things that made Rocco work. We don't care about Romeo, we don't know much of his story, we don't feel a connection to him, or between him & the brothers, and we could care less if he gets blasted. He's unfunny, and his comic relief felt like it needed a constant rimshot so we knew when to laugh. Just...horrid. The actor who plays Romeo is actually quite talented (see him in "Tigerland") but it was a horrendous inclusion in this flick. Everything about him was painful and annoying. A damn shame.
The original three detectives are back. And they're older, and looking rough. And my dear lord it's possibly the most difficult thing to watch 2 really bad actors working with 1 moderately bad actor. I mean jesus, if I was a fringe actor like these 3 are I would nail it when I got asked to reprise a role that I'm slightly known for. These guys stumbled through their lines, cursed, yelled, bonked heads, poked eyes...I kept waiting for one of them to go "Nyuk nyuk nyuk". Greenly was the only one with an ounce of entertainment (and he was one of the really bad actors) mainly because he had some substance. His little sexual banter with the FBI agent was decent, and when he came skating by in the dream sequence ("thanks for comin' out") I felt a twinge of sadness. Shame.
Speaking of that ice rink sequence...seriously? WTF was that? I can't say I disliked it, but it was just a completely out of place rant.
The new FBI agent isn't Paul Smecker (Willem DaFoe), and admit it, you miss his faggoty ass. :) Instead it's this hottie with a southern accent who throws down such gems as, "I'm so smaart I maake smaart people feel retaarded." (That's me typing in a southern drawl). Oh my. She easily did the best acting in the movie, because we had to believe that she was out to the get the Saints and then ooh surprise. I didn't dislike her that much, but I didn't like her as much as I liked Willem DeFoe. Yes, I know he's gay and me saying I like a gay guy means I'm gay. Damn you are so funny! But she basically ripped off the Smecker routine 100%. With the headphones, and the gunfights going on around her as she's walking through them, and the cowboy hat...okay the cowboy hat could've been hot if I wasn't so pissed off at that point at the movie. Damn shame.
Il Duce is back and /yawn. There's a couple new villains, none of which are all that impressive. The short guy complex was embarrassing (boy "embarrassing seems to be the most frequently used word here...). Judd Nelson is the big bad guy, right? Oh wait, nope, there's a secret big bad guy. And Judd Nelson...wow, just terrible. The inclusion of some fat, weird, naked, mid-level gangster named "Handsome George" or something was just off the wall and even the appearance of old friends like Fuck-Ass the bartender just came across as cheesy. Damn shame. FUCK! ASS!
Okay, so on to the meat & potatoes of the Boondock Saints, the gunfights & witty dialog, right? Wrong. The gunfights were terrible. Slow motion has been overused to the point where it's commonplace in any movie where there is shooting. We're full circle now and it's NOT being used. I remember in the first one enjoying the fight sequences a lot. They were exciting, well shot and creative. Plus we were seeing the results after the detectives were on scene and they were explaining how it all went down. Back then that was very cool. They try it in this one and just fall flat on their face. I don't know why, but perhaps it's because we've seen it before. The gunfights are honestly, quite boring compared to some of the other stuff we're seeing lately. Look at an action movie nowadays like "The Dark Knight" or "The Matrix" or "The Notebook" (Kyrillian's favorite) and you see well shot shooting sequences that in some cases (Matrix) slow down in the perfect/clever spots, or in other cases (Dark Knight) don't even need to slow down because that would distract from the frantic pace of the sequence. My point is: what made the original good and unique now comes across bland and boring. Poorly shot gunfights to music in slow motion.../yawn. Shame!
"But Boon!" You're saying, "Didn't you like anything???" Well as a matter of fact, I did! Il Duce's back story was good, and it ended up tying up all the loose ends but damn it took a while to get there. The appearance of an old friend at the end was nice, although the accents got a little funky in their conversation, but that was still cool. There were some good one-liners, and I laughed out loud when I heard Murphy say: "And here I am AGAIN all tyin' myself up with rope! What is the deal with you and rope? Honestly!" and then Connor says "It happens ta be a useful thing!" or when they give Romeo a tiny .22 and tell him that it builds character and he says "yeah, character of a little bitch" and Connor says "Now that's just unprofessional." Funny...but the second I'd start laughing I'd look at Connor's fucked up plastic surgery face and... what a damn shame.
I disliked way more than I liked. I mentioned in the begging of this novel of a review, you can always spot someone's "life's work". I guarantee that Troy Duffy watches this movie and is not proud of it. I'm sure he likes bits of it, but as a whole I doubt he loves everything about it. Definitely not his "life's work"...
And they left this one wide open for a sequel. Perhaps part 3 will redeem the series...after all, Boondock II made a whopping $2 million. I would like to see someone else take the reins on part 3 and really do a number on it. I hate to say "reboot", but after this pile of crap I'd say that's the only way to make this series good again. DAMN SHAME.
1.5/5
The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day
I imagine there will be one person reading this review with a smirk on his face. So I guess something good will come from this mess of a movie.
10 years ago I saw the original "Boondock Saints" and loved it (hard to believe, isn't it!). My kind of movie. A movie about justified vengeance, retribution, good vs. evil, striking down the wicked, etc. Back then the action sequences were stylish; bullet-time and slow motion hadn't been done to death and the storytelling in the Tarantino-style was still fresh. I thought it was unique, creative, and entertaining without being overly pretentious. Since then this storytelling style has been overused. Now, slow motion action sequences, gruesome violence and 50+ f-bombs are the norm. You watch the original "Boondock Saints" today and you'll enjoy it, but not as much because we've become numb to what made us (some of us anyway ;) ) love the original.
When I first heard about the sequel I had mixed emotions. Part of me was excited, since I was such a big fan of the original. Part of me was not, because most of the time a sequel fails to live up to the original (name 5 sequels that are better than the original..."Empire Strikes Back"..."Aliens"..."T2"..."Toy Story 2?"). Sequels are generally cash grabs, and for an underground success like this, a sequel is not a good idea unless it's going big budget and even then it rarely works. Plus, why did they need a sequel? The original had a very clear beginning, middle and end. No question marks, no underdeveloped characters, no remaining bad guys...
You can always tell someone's "life's work". That one thing that they worked on for 10+ years, writing, re-writing, showing to friends and family, adjusting, revising, saving all their money to finance, finally getting their big break and releasing their pride and joy. You can see that it's something that they are completely proud of and have put a lot of work into. Look at the music industry. When someone's first album comes out a lot of times it's often incredible, with a bunch of really good songs, because they've been working on that 1 album for years and years. Then they are successful and the "sophomore slump" hits because it's a mass-produced cash grab that's written, recorded & released in a fraction of the time the first one was released.
To me the original felt like Troy Duffy's "life's work". I know the guy was an egotistical tool and made many mistakes, but the movie itself had the shine and polish of something that he was proud of. Every line, every scene, I'm sure he loves. No regrets, nothing he wants to change, it's his finished product. (I'm sure there are parts of the original that aren't perfect, but you get what I'm saying.)
And then there's the sequel.
/sigh
I think the best way to describe my feelings on the sequel is this: it's a damn shame.
This movie could have been great. It really could have. But it wasn't. It was just plain terrible. And for me, a huge BDS fanboi--I've been playing characters named "Boondock" for 10 years now (CS & WoW)--, it was honestly one of the most painful movie watching experiences of my life. I wanted to like it, I wanted it to be good, I kept waiting for it to get better. You know how forgiving I am with movies, I even gave "The Phantom Menace" 5 stars because I'm such a fanboy! I was ready to forgive this movie for almost everything, but I just couldn't.
And here's why:
(seriously, if you haven't seen it don't read this because I give a lot away)
This was the most pretentious movie I've ever seen...it was basically saying, "you should accept and like everything because it's got 'Boondock' and 'Saints' in the title." It felt like they didn't even work all that hard at being good, it was just a foregone conclusion that it would be a success like the original.
First things first, the main character, Connor (Sean Patrick Flanery) has had such terrible plastic surgery over the last 10 years that it is embarrassing. I was more distracted and bothered by that almost more than anything else in this film. Not to sound overly gay, but he made the first movie, and his acting and facial expressions were great. Okay that sounded a little gay, but I hope you know what I mean...and if you've seen this movie you know exactly what I'm talking about. He looks like a totally different person. To the point where people thought he was replaced when the movie trailers came out. You know it's bad when Norman Reedus looks good compared to your messed up face. Google search for "Sean Patrick Flanery Plastic Surgery (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=sean+patrick+flanery+plastic+surgery&aq=2&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=sean+patric&gs_rfai=CxvAjZZlITIbEFYzEiQOP4fjFCQAAAKoEBU_Q7JWd)" = lots of results) Damn shame.
So let's talk about the characters. I think it's important to mention that Rocco was loud, obnoxious but quite awesome in the first one. Great sidekick, had a good backstory, was used very well as a supplemental character in the story, and you felt a connection to him, felt the connection between him and the brothers and felt a sense of loss when he died. He's replaced by Romeo, this terribly stereotypical Mexican guy who is replacing Rocco but without any of the things that made Rocco work. We don't care about Romeo, we don't know much of his story, we don't feel a connection to him, or between him & the brothers, and we could care less if he gets blasted. He's unfunny, and his comic relief felt like it needed a constant rimshot so we knew when to laugh. Just...horrid. The actor who plays Romeo is actually quite talented (see him in "Tigerland") but it was a horrendous inclusion in this flick. Everything about him was painful and annoying. A damn shame.
The original three detectives are back. And they're older, and looking rough. And my dear lord it's possibly the most difficult thing to watch 2 really bad actors working with 1 moderately bad actor. I mean jesus, if I was a fringe actor like these 3 are I would nail it when I got asked to reprise a role that I'm slightly known for. These guys stumbled through their lines, cursed, yelled, bonked heads, poked eyes...I kept waiting for one of them to go "Nyuk nyuk nyuk". Greenly was the only one with an ounce of entertainment (and he was one of the really bad actors) mainly because he had some substance. His little sexual banter with the FBI agent was decent, and when he came skating by in the dream sequence ("thanks for comin' out") I felt a twinge of sadness. Shame.
Speaking of that ice rink sequence...seriously? WTF was that? I can't say I disliked it, but it was just a completely out of place rant.
The new FBI agent isn't Paul Smecker (Willem DaFoe), and admit it, you miss his faggoty ass. :) Instead it's this hottie with a southern accent who throws down such gems as, "I'm so smaart I maake smaart people feel retaarded." (That's me typing in a southern drawl). Oh my. She easily did the best acting in the movie, because we had to believe that she was out to the get the Saints and then ooh surprise. I didn't dislike her that much, but I didn't like her as much as I liked Willem DeFoe. Yes, I know he's gay and me saying I like a gay guy means I'm gay. Damn you are so funny! But she basically ripped off the Smecker routine 100%. With the headphones, and the gunfights going on around her as she's walking through them, and the cowboy hat...okay the cowboy hat could've been hot if I wasn't so pissed off at that point at the movie. Damn shame.
Il Duce is back and /yawn. There's a couple new villains, none of which are all that impressive. The short guy complex was embarrassing (boy "embarrassing seems to be the most frequently used word here...). Judd Nelson is the big bad guy, right? Oh wait, nope, there's a secret big bad guy. And Judd Nelson...wow, just terrible. The inclusion of some fat, weird, naked, mid-level gangster named "Handsome George" or something was just off the wall and even the appearance of old friends like Fuck-Ass the bartender just came across as cheesy. Damn shame. FUCK! ASS!
Okay, so on to the meat & potatoes of the Boondock Saints, the gunfights & witty dialog, right? Wrong. The gunfights were terrible. Slow motion has been overused to the point where it's commonplace in any movie where there is shooting. We're full circle now and it's NOT being used. I remember in the first one enjoying the fight sequences a lot. They were exciting, well shot and creative. Plus we were seeing the results after the detectives were on scene and they were explaining how it all went down. Back then that was very cool. They try it in this one and just fall flat on their face. I don't know why, but perhaps it's because we've seen it before. The gunfights are honestly, quite boring compared to some of the other stuff we're seeing lately. Look at an action movie nowadays like "The Dark Knight" or "The Matrix" or "The Notebook" (Kyrillian's favorite) and you see well shot shooting sequences that in some cases (Matrix) slow down in the perfect/clever spots, or in other cases (Dark Knight) don't even need to slow down because that would distract from the frantic pace of the sequence. My point is: what made the original good and unique now comes across bland and boring. Poorly shot gunfights to music in slow motion.../yawn. Shame!
"But Boon!" You're saying, "Didn't you like anything???" Well as a matter of fact, I did! Il Duce's back story was good, and it ended up tying up all the loose ends but damn it took a while to get there. The appearance of an old friend at the end was nice, although the accents got a little funky in their conversation, but that was still cool. There were some good one-liners, and I laughed out loud when I heard Murphy say: "And here I am AGAIN all tyin' myself up with rope! What is the deal with you and rope? Honestly!" and then Connor says "It happens ta be a useful thing!" or when they give Romeo a tiny .22 and tell him that it builds character and he says "yeah, character of a little bitch" and Connor says "Now that's just unprofessional." Funny...but the second I'd start laughing I'd look at Connor's fucked up plastic surgery face and... what a damn shame.
I disliked way more than I liked. I mentioned in the begging of this novel of a review, you can always spot someone's "life's work". I guarantee that Troy Duffy watches this movie and is not proud of it. I'm sure he likes bits of it, but as a whole I doubt he loves everything about it. Definitely not his "life's work"...
And they left this one wide open for a sequel. Perhaps part 3 will redeem the series...after all, Boondock II made a whopping $2 million. I would like to see someone else take the reins on part 3 and really do a number on it. I hate to say "reboot", but after this pile of crap I'd say that's the only way to make this series good again. DAMN SHAME.
1.5/5