Why the hate?


Can't seem to understand why this got low ratings, plus why do comedies always tend to get lower ratings?

Like here's a movie starring 7 famous actors all which can legit act and be funny, an intriguing plot that manages to keep the viewers attention by being smart, funny, and creative, has tons of jokes plus it even tried to be different than the first movie. So why the low ratings?

reply

Comedy + sequel = low ratings (unless it's 22 Jump Street)

Kick-Ass 2 is another example of a good movie that got so much hate from critics for no reason.

reply

Yep. I thought this was a lot funnier than the first.

reply

i was surprised how boring this movie was as i turned it off about 1hr5min into it. i was surprised because i mildly like the first movie (i.e. 6/10) at least based on my initial viewing as ill have to re-watch that fairly soon to make sure i still like it though.

2/10 (failure and/or boring)

----------
My IMDb Movie Lists etc = http://goo.gl/pZ8XG
----------

reply

I agree. I don't get it. It was nonstop funny with a talented cast. I don't know what else people could expect from a comedy of this type.

reply

There is a difference between funny and stupid. This movie was too damn stupid to make anyone laugh. Much of the comedic moments were forced and contrived. The main characters were beyond stupid, not to mention highly irritating with their ramblings.

It just didn't do it for me and I'm not the sort of person who'll down-rank a movie automatically just because its a sequel. Having said that the first one was much better in all aspects.

He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither ~ B. Franklin

reply

By far the best characters in the first movie were not the three main leads... but rather Aniston, Spacey and Farrell. Not just because we weren't used to seeing them in such roles but also because they were genuinely very funny. They were the real stars of the first movie, not the so called lead actors. But of those three, Bateman was easily the best, Sudeikis was funny in places while Day was not, is not and never will be funny in any way, shape or form.

The sequel sucks huge balls because the story is very poor, the three bosses that made the first movie funny are mostly missing - Farrell completely - with the rest vacuously left to the three extremely unfunny leads getting into extremely unfunny situations.

In summary, the sequel is total bollocks compared to the first.

reply

Day was not, is not and never will be funny in any way, shape or form.
And your opinion is now invalid. You probably hated the Lego Movie too.



No f@cking sh`t lady does it sound like I'm ordering a pizza!

reply

Comedy is my second favorite genre. This was a great comedy.
I saw it in the theatres and loved it.
Just watched the extended version on bluray and loved even more.
Every scene had a lol moment imo.
I really love the type of humor used in both movies.
"Well look what we got?"..lol
I think story-wise the first is better.
This one was funnier imo and that's saying a lot since the first one was great.

--


I don't know what type of thatched hut you lived in.....

reply

Because people have different senses of humor and didn't get the humor. It's sad to see a hundred threads saying it's bad. I thought it was way funnier than the first.

reply

come on, idiot-didn't "get it"? are you joking? It was just three guys who were messing around on camera., No script. No characterizations at all. No resemblance to the first movie, which actually was very funny!

reply

dude, youre high or really dumb. The entire movie was just one ad-lib-and had no focus. The only remotely funny scenes were with Anniston.

reply

I agree. Just how stupid are we to believe a person (Charlie Day's character) can be? Very few laughs, and I was really looking forward to it.

At least Aniston looked hot as hell and provided the few laughs in the film.

reply

Comedies are difficult. People don't laugh at the same things.

For example, this movie made me laugh a few times, but it still felt very disjointed.
The 3 major characters didn't seem the same as in the first movie, instead they were like the 3 stooges and that shouting between them... oooh, that got annoying real fast for me.

reply

This

It was literally like a bad carbon copy of the first where the characters were literally replaced by the three stooges

The first one had tempo, this one is just three dudes rambling

Chris Pine was pretty funny though - that was surprising!

Follow the latest films around the world!! http://7films.dendelionblu.me

reply

I assumed the plot didn't come together well, because I didn't think it could, but it wasn't bad at all.. Just a bit of a stretch but not a huge one.

reply