The same sort of concept, the same type of jokes, the same actors. Then why is this movie not as a good as the first one as well?

I won't say that it's totally because Jim Abrahams and David Zucker into being involved with this movie but it's of course part of the reason. Instead, this movie feels too much like an "Airplane" wannabe, that isn't ever being creative and original enough on its own and mostly builds on the success and the successful formula of the first movie but without ever expanding on it. It even recycles a lot of the same jokes and situations from the first movie, which was especially disappointing and became real tiresome after a while and besides made the movie a very predictable. There basically is no reason why you should watch this movie when you have already seen the first one. It really hardly ever does anything new or surprising!

It's basically a rehash of the first movie, only this time set in space. Not that it changes much really. Still the same cockpit, still the same plane interiors and still the same control-tower and airfield, with also all of the same familiar faces. Sure, it's nice to see some of the actors from the first movie return in this one but I do feel that this movie would have been a better and certainly more original one if it featured some more new characters in it as well.

Storywise, this movie also doesn't impress to much. It's of course not like any goofy comedy ever features a really brilliant story in it but this movie is a bit too simplistic and deliberately dumb and silly, with every single story development and plot line. But also the storytelling itself is truly lacking. It basically throws you right in the middle of things and it doesn't waste any time on setting any things- or any of its characters up first. Of course it's true that that also is partly due to the fact that this is a sequel, so we already are familiar with its setup and most of movie its characters. We know their story and background already but it would have been nice to spend some more time with the characters, before things would start to go awry for them. It potentially could have made this movie a more engaging one and the characters some more likable ones as well.

But sure, I still laughed plenty during this movie. And how could you not? It keeps throwing jokes and visual gags at you, at a very high rate and rapid pace. This ensures that there are always some things that really work out as something comical. For every one joke that doesn't hit, there is one that does. And the movie is too fast paced for you to ever cringe- or feel annoyed by some of the movie its bad jokes and comical moments.

Still, you should stick to the first movie instead! Just because this movie has a few laughs in it doesn't mean it's a great and entirely effective one as well. And it most certainly is not up to par with the originality and high comedy quality and timing of the first movie!

6/10

Watch trailer

(Review originally written at 22 February 2008)

More was to be expected quite frankly from this Michael Moore political satire, poking fun at American society and politics. The movie did of course had its funny moments but the story was quite poorly done.

Sorry Mr. Moore but the storytelling within this movie is just below average. Michael Moore obviously tried to make a comedy in a silly style but he just never goes all the way, presumably because he probably was too afraid his message wouldn't come across then. He also tries too hard to make the movie kick against several political issues, for which Moore is of course well known. It however doesn't always work out in this movie and it feels too forced. It also isn't always a good movie to watch since the way the main plot-line is told is highly unlikely. It feels like a too big coincidence all that Sheriff Bud B. Boomer and friends just happen to be involved in basically every aspect handled within the movie. This concept works in often lots of comedies but just not "Canadian Bacon" because of its quite messy storytelling. It made the movie painful to watch at times.

What made the movie still perfectly watchable for me was its cast. John Candy, Alan Alda, Rhea Perlman, Kevin Pollak, Rip Torn, Kevin J. O'Connor, Bill Nunn, G.D. Spradlin, James Belushi, Dan Aykroyd, this movie has a true amazing comedy cast. They really uplifted the movie in my viewing experience. This was John Candy's last released movie and even though its not his best role out of his career, it's still a worthy one.

It's silly concept and story also makes this movie worthwhile to watch in parts. It's of course quite funny to have a story involving America creating a sort of new cold war this time with Canadia, in order for the president to get reelected. It's even funnier to notice some parallels to the real world this present day and the Bush administration. So saying this movie is completely ineffective won't be fair. It also does some good job at times poking fun of American society, as well as the Canadian and all of their stereotypes. Of course Moore mostly kicks against the gun control, something he did of course much better and more effective later on in his documentary "Bowling for Columbine", for which he won an Oscar.

It's a watchable enough film, though you probably can't help ending up being slightly disappointed with it.

6/10

(Review originally written at 14 August 2006)

Leave it up to movies from the '70's to deliver a movie with a well build up tension and a realistic suspense. This movie is one of those typical well build up thrillers from the '70's, that however in the end still falls sort of flat, due to some improbabilities in the story.

The movie begins slow, perhaps unnecessarily slow, to set up the characters and their relations. It does give the movie a certain sense of realism and at times suspense but it also provides the movie with some unnecessary long sequences that don't really add enough to the movie and its style. It's has '70's written all over it but the movie is not as 'experimental' as other genre movies from the same period. The cinematography by Victor J. Kemper is without any fancy tricks and the musical score by Jerry Goldsmith is (disappointingly) simple. All indications that this movie was made in the late '70's. It still has '70's style but without all the movie technical experimental elements, like genre movies from the more early '70's. It does make this movie more watchable for a wider audience.

Basically from a technical point of view, the thriller elements in this movie are well build up and executed in the movie but unfortunately the story itself is filled with too many loose ends and improbabilities to consider this a perfectly made thriller. Too bad, since the premise itself of the movie is quite good. Especially in the end the movie becomes more and more unlikely. For instance why only just O.R. 8? Wouldn't that just arouse automatically suspicious after a while? And why does Susan Wheeler keep returning to the hospital, were she knows that she has more enemies than friends. All logically flawed plot elements that causes the movie to be a bit unlikely and not always credible as a thriller.

It's nice to see that the main character of the movie is a female. Geneviève Bujold delivers a strong performance in the main lead. I don't know, for some reason the movie also becomes more realistic because of that the main lead is a female. With a male lead movies like these too often and too easy turn into heroic macho movies, which are not halve as credible. The movie also has a very solid supporting cast, with lots of actors that later grew out to be big ones, such as of course Michael Douglas but also Rip Torn, Tom Selleck and Ed Harris, who portray some much smaller roles.

Overall this still is one fine typical '70's thriller. As long as you can see past its flawed script and don't expect too much of a masterpiece, you'll certainly enjoy watching this movie.

7/10

Watch trailer

(Review originally written at 3 April 2006)

First of all I can understand how someone could love this movie but I can also understand how someone could totally hate it. This movie and especially its humor is really a matter of taste more than anything else.

I wouldn't dare to call this movie a good one. In fact it's far from it. Most of the moments in the movie make absolutely no sense and there is almost absolutely no story present. Most of the humor is also very vulgar and just totally over-the-top gross and visual. But yet this movie also really made me laugh. So how could I, when being completely fair and unbiased, possible call this movie a bad one?

I think that this movie is so bad that it becomes good. The jokes in the movie really aren't that strong but because they are delivered so incredibly over-the-top and stupid, it becomes truly an hilarious movie at times. Yes, so basically the movie is so stupid that it becomes a good one.

The story is just totally weird and stupid and lacks some consistency. All of the events occurring in the movie don't really always feel connected. The comical situations are far from believable and they almost have nothing to do with the main story. In fact most of the time they are completely tasteless. Some, if not most people will probably not be able to handle this not so subtle sense of humor (also hence the low rating here). No it absolutely is not the most subtle and consistent comedy ever made.

Tom Green is totally over-the-top and crazy. He is not always funny but his character makes the crazy story somehow work. Rip Torn also shows his comical talent and he perhaps plays the best part of the movie. All of the other characters are somewhat muddled in to the crazy story.

A comedy that doesn't make any sense but because of that becomes quite hilarious to watch at times. Clearly not a movie for everyone's taste obviously though.

6/10

Watch trailer