PDA

View Full Version : The Boondock Saints 2: All Saints Day


Mr.HyDe807
11-05-2009, 04:12 PM
http://www.impawards.com/2009/posters/boondock_saints_ii_all_saints_day.jpg

Directed by: Troy Duffy

Written By: troy Duffy and Taylor Duffy

Plot:For the last 8 years the brothers have been living with their father on a sheep farm deep in isolated Ireland. One day their uncle tells them that they have been framed for the murder of a Bostonian Catholic priest. The boys must return to Boston to not only clear their names but find the men who framed them

Starring:Sean Patrick Flanery, Norman Reedus, Billy Connolly, Clifton Collins, and Julie Benz

My review:

You are a joke, Troy Duffy. You think my brother, his friend, and I couldn't see straight through this movie? Well, we did, and thankfully there was a higher power at work here because somebody knew we were in for a rough ride, so we were able to see it for free thanks to a girl that worked at the theater and knew my brother. Even my brother, who regards the first one as his favorite movie, was shocked on how terrible this movie was. That's what we get when we have a director who thinks doing almost the exact same thing from the first one will automatically garner affections from this die hard fans. Sorry Duffy, but I caught on to your regurgitated mess of a flick.

The 1999 original is a cult classic in many peoples' eyes, my brother included. it involves two Irish catholic fraternal twin brothers who go on a vigilante crusade against mobsters and pimps, all in the name of god. For me, it's a good action movie, something to watch every now and then. It has 2 likable leads in Norman Reedus and Sean Patrick Flanery as the brothers, Willem Dafoe is awesome as the FBI agent who gets on their tale, and pretty good comedic moments from David Della Rocco, who plays a friend that wants to get in on the brothers' action.

Yet, here we are in 2009, at least 10 years after the first flick, and Troy Duffy is under the impression that what we liked in the first one would be nice to be presented again in the 2nd. Yet, that's the problem, he thinks we want almost the exact same movie we saw in 1999. No, I want to see a something a bit different, something that works upon what we saw in the original, not something that almost resembles what I saw in the first one! We have a somewhat new plot that follows the events from the first one, but it just leads to action sequences that are ripped from the first one, only executed in a different setting. There are flashback sequences involving Il Duce (Billy Connolly) that is integral to the plot, that tries to bring something new; but it unfortunately drags the movie down even further.

It also doesn't help that some of the cast members that made the first one enjoyable are just about nowhere to be seen, considering the events that took place in the first one.Yet, Duffy tires to nurture the previous fans with scenes to make sure no one is disappointed, but at points it almost has nothing to do with the story. Hell, the opening has some clever opening monologue by a returning character, but it seems it's just there in order to calm the fans that want to see that character.

It also doesn't help that we are left with 2 characters in the sequel, Romeo (Clifton Collins Jr.) and Special Agent Eunice Bloom (Julie Benz), who are trying to take place of Dafoe and Rocco. Yet, the character of Bloom has no purpose only to emulate Dafoe's character in the first one, accompanied by sequences that are exactly like the original. Then we have Romeo, a tough Spanish dude who is not even funny, just an annoyance to watch. His running jokes are horrible, and just make the experience worse. What hurts even more is that all the supporting members that return are stuck with horrible comedic moments that just makes their presence a nuance, and not at all welcoming. Oh, and anything that involved Peter Fonda or Judd Nelson nearly put me to sleep.

Yet, we have the Macmanus brothers and their father from the first one. This was the only shining point I could make out through this whole movie. I enjoyed how Reedus and Flanery played off each other, as well as their shtick to screw around with the Romeo character. Some parts fell flat, but nowhere as bad as the other characters. There were also little funny moments that I have to admit got a good chuckle out of me, but they were defintiely few and far in between.

So, all in all, if your a fan of the first Boondock Saints, just stick with that. There's no need to see the same movie again, despite some new bells and whistles that don't even work in the first place. Yet, if you want check it out, either wait for DVD or find a friend that works at a movie theater that gets you in for free.

2/10

Jimbo513
11-06-2009, 10:41 AM
Julie Benz is in this? I absolutely love Dexter but I think she is a weak actor. She is a little one dimensional. Her voice gets really annoying too.

I'll see this just cause the first movie is one of my favorites, but I am not expecting much. Troy Duffy comes off as a pretentious douche bag that some how through dumb luck made a great movie 10 years ago and never quite moved on or had the same luck again. Sort of like Broken Lizard and Super Troopers.

Just let it die Troy. Move on and do something else with your life. You're really just embarrassing yourself at this point.

ElDuderino
11-06-2009, 05:30 PM
I was on the fence about seeing this one. When I watched the trailer, I let an audible groan out when Julie Bentz starts doing Dafoe's shtick from the first one. I do appreciate the heads up HyDe. I'll definitely RedBox it or something. It's only a dollar.

QUENTIN
11-06-2009, 08:09 PM
I'd probably be more interested in seeing this if the first one wasn't an abortion of celluloid.

APzombie
11-07-2009, 11:10 PM
I can only hope that when compared, this converts more to see how equally vapid and empty the original is.

bigred760
11-10-2009, 12:43 AM
I do want to see this; I'm a fan of the first and was glad to see a sequel with the original cast returning. Just don't know if this will be released in the Atlanta area anytime soon.

QUENTIN
11-12-2009, 01:52 PM
Roger Ebert */**** (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091111/REVIEWS/911119995)

"Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day" is an idiotic ode to macho horseshite (to employ an ancient Irish word). It is however distinguished by superb cinematography. It's the first film in 10 years from Troy Duffy, whose "Boondock Saints" (1999) has become a cult film. It's such a legendary film, a documentary was even made about it.

No, not one of those "the making of" jobs. One made by two of Duffy's former pals who got pissed off during the filming. They show him as a possibly alcoholic egomaniac. You know you're in trouble when your movie scores 16 percent on the Tomatometer, and the documentary about it scores 79 percent.

To quote from my review of the 2003 doc: "'Overnight' tells a riches-to-rags story, like 'Project Greenlight' played in reverse. 'Greenlight,' you will recall, is the Miramax contest to choose and produce one script every year by a first-time filmmaker. In 'Overnight,' the director starts out with a contract and money, and works his way back to no contract, no film and no money. Call it 'Project Red Light.'"

The documentary validates Gene Siskel's favorite verdict: "I'd rather see a documentary of the same people having lunch." In this case, you see the same people getting drunk. After Duffy signs with the William Morris Agency, he brags to his pals, "I get drunk at night, wake up hung over, go into those meetings in my overalls, and they're all wearing suits." Being agents, they were probably more familiar with the danger signs of alcoholism than Duffy was.

"Boondock Saints" cost $7 million and grossed $25,000 in two weeks in five theaters. Then a miracle occurred. It became a big hit on DVD -- so big, this sequel was justified. Along with the great cinematography, it has extensive special effects and good actors (Sean Patrick Flanery, Norman Reedus, Billy Connolly, Clifton Collins Jr., Judd Nelson and an unrecognizable Peter Fonda).

Flanery and Reedus are back from the original as Connor and Murphy MacManus, two Irish Catholic brothers who executed countless Boston villains with bullets through the head and pennies on their eyes. Brothers? To me they look like twins. They now lead a quiet life in Ireland, herding sheep and smoking. Brokeback bachelors. After 10 years, still unmarried, they live at home with old Poppy MacManus (Billy Connolly) in a cottage perhaps once inhabited by Ryan's Daughter's great-grandmother.

Word comes that a beloved Irish-American priest has been executed back in Boston, with pennies on his eyes. This calls for revenge: Someone is imitating their style! Electrified, the lads rush back to the States on a freight ship and go into action, killing, oh, I'd say, hundreds of people, easily. This is done very well, in the way of stunts, f/x and heavy metal cranked up to 12.

The lads borrow a page from their old Poppy and don leather vests with build-in holsters for either four or six handguns, I forget. These they typically use while leaping in slo-mo off concealed trampolines while firing two guns each at the camera. If they always jump side by side, does that make it harder for their enemies to miss at least one? Can you fly forward through the air while firing two heavy-duty handguns without your arms jerking back and smacking you in the chin? Would that violate one of Newton's laws? Just askin'.

There's a lot of pious Roman Catholic iconography, though no one except the beloved executed priest ever goes into a church for purposes other than being murdered. The lads are loyal to the church in the same way their fans are loyal to Da Bears. They aren't players themselves, but it's their team and don't mess with it. They do hold a quasi-religious ceremony, standing in a circle with a pal and vowing to never, ever, stop smoking or drinking or attend an AA meeting. Drinking doesn't bother them, anyway. They chug whiskey like Gatorade. The only thing that bothers them, and they're super sensitive about this, is the slightest suggestion that they're gay.

Though in the movie's defense, he did like 2012.

scottmushroom
11-12-2009, 03:42 PM
I do want to see this; I'm a fan of the first and was glad to see a sequel with the original cast returning. Just don't know if this will be released in the Atlanta area anytime soon.
According to the official site it will be at a few theaters around here starting....TOMORROW!!!

This first available showing ive found is a midnight screening at Barrett Commons.....TONIGHT!!!

The only issue there for me is that I have to work at 6 am....TOMORROW!!!

So it'll be sometime this weekend for me

the_sneaker
11-17-2009, 10:19 PM
Though I plan to talk more about this movie at a later time, I will say this:

Boondock Saints II was not nearly as bad as I was fearing. Having spent the past seven years in anticipation waiting to see it, I was expecting to be let down. However, it was pretty enjoyable.

The thing most people need to understand, is that this definitely was made for the fans, which is kind of a let down for me. Duffy used over-the-top humor when it wasn't necessary, and it killed a lot of scenes that could have been a lot better.

While the film felt more like a fan-boy flick than anything else, it was still satisfying to see the brothers back...

...as well as to see an old familiar face return.

All Saints Day is not for everyone. If you didn't like the first one (or if you're one of those people who hates others for liking the first one), then just skip it. However, if you really love the first one, there is a good chance that you'll have a blast with All Saints Day.

CyclicNightmare
11-18-2009, 03:52 AM
Ebert's review seems positive to me.

Earl Bonds
11-20-2009, 01:05 AM
crazy that that make a sequel to such a shitty ass movie. I guess thats what we have to come to expect from hollywood these days....

the_sneaker
11-20-2009, 02:48 AM
crazy that that make a sequel to such a shitty ass movie. I guess thats what we have to come to expect from hollywood these days....

Yeah.....Hollywood had very little to do with this one, trust me.

dfnshow
11-20-2009, 02:54 AM
loved it...going to see it again today

JoeCool
11-26-2009, 04:26 PM
Just caught this movie last night, and I have to say, I was so surprised at what I saw. I wanted to go see The Road, but apparently it isnt anywhere in my state. So I went to see Boondock Saints 2. I am a huge fan of the first movie, and I assumed this was going to be an egotistical shitfest, because lets face it Troy Duffy is a tool. Now this movie is extremely egotistical, but is no shitfest. If you enjoyed the first film this movie will keep you entertained throughout. The Tarantino inspired film making is back, complete with gratuitous slo-mo violence galore. The film is very very tounge in cheek, and snide. For fans of the first there is many winks at the first, my favorite being when they go to get weapons from the guy from the first movie, and the place is a lot bigger and better equiped. The gun dealer says "When people heard I may or may not have equiped you guys, business exploded, turns out you guys have quite the underground following" I loved it!
As far as acting Billy Connely is great as always, just chewing up every scene he is in. I thought I would get annoyed by Julie Benz, but she earned my respect by somehow looking hotter every single scene. Norman Reedus and Sean Patrick Flanery play off each other well once again. For ten years later they still are in great shape, and are believable as the hard drinking Irish boys. Also Clifton Collins Jr was great as the new sidekick Romeo, he was as much fun as Rocco in the first movie. Maybe even more so.
While watching this movie I could just feel the excitement from the cast. They were so happy that this movie was able to get made. And it shows in every scene. This movie is made for the fans, and if you go into it to have fun, you will
This for me, is just as good as the first movie, maybe even better if it holds up to repeat viewings.

8/10

jbar1026
12-12-2009, 03:42 AM
saw it today 7/10 not as good as the first. but i think its the scrpts fault. it just wasnt as well writen as number 1 and that made some scenes feel off.

the good things about the movie are the actors they all fall back into there roles with ease and that helped the movie a bunch.

overall a good movie that falls short of great

swashbuccaler
12-12-2009, 12:52 PM
Yeah.....Hollywood had very little to do with this one, trust me.

LOL "trust you"

Someone saw the documentary...

echo_bravo
12-12-2009, 03:35 PM
"They do hold a quasi-religious ceremony, standing in a circle with a pal and vowing to never, ever, stop smoking or drinking or attend an AA meeting. Drinking doesn't bother them, anyway. They chug whiskey like Gatorade. The only thing that bothers them, and they're super sensitive about this, is the slightest suggestion that they're gay. "

haha Ebert cracks me up sometimes.