This followup to the hit Ong Bak has nothing to do with the original Ong Bak, and it seems like the producers were simply trying to cash in on the name, but boy- why did they have to? This movie stands upto itself on its own. Tight editing, lots of superb fight sequences, lots of innovative battle techniques, minimal storyline meaning minimal time wasted on anything but the raw action that we are there to see; all makes it a great movie impossible to miss. You get glued to your seat and wont even blink. Somebody wrote he was bored, which I tried hard to understand- but couldn't. Man, action movies don't get bigger or better than this. Its like Gladiator meets Apocalypto meets Rambo, only better. Raw gut wrenching intensity makes it a pleasure to watch. Don't miss this.
Add a Review
-
DICK STEEL3 January 2009There's no doubt I've been a fan of movies starring Tony Jaa with the likes of Ong Bak and Tom Yum Goong being showcases for the Muay Thai brand of martial arts, and I fondly remember those hard hitting action sequences that left me gaping, as well as the numerous replays just to drum it through to you that it's all Jaa and it's all as incredible as can be. And who can forget the latter film with that amazing single take where Jaa had to pound his way from the bottom of a building right to the top? Ong Bak 2 is a film fans like myself have been waiting for, despite it being marred by some really strange controversy, which also included Jaa walking off the set and disappearing from production. But everything's been sorted I guess, for the film to be completed and finally released.
While it's rocking the box office in Thailand, I wonder whether it's because of the controversies that had piqued everyone's interest, or it's because the long break of 3 years had made everyone salivate at Jaa's long awaited return to the big screen. I wonder because while there are numerous moments in the film that I thoroughly enjoyed, I felt that it fell short too on other areas that had left me shifting in my seat, especially during the first hour.
And the biggest culprit of it all, would be the ending. Tony Jaa wrote this story, and credit to him too in trying to weave together some semblance of a worthy story instead of the more obvious and easier whack-fest end to end. But the ending was somewhat of a cop out, and a disappointment, as it leads potentially and very directly to a third movie to resolve the issues the storyline had left hanging. It could have easily stretched it to say, 20 minutes more to get everything settled, but I guess there were grander plans to the tale that needed another movie to tell. One only wishes that it does get made sooner rather than later, and without the production woes that plagued this one.
So Ong Bak 2 is actually half a movie, and given that it's a totally new story to begin with, I thought it would make better sense in retitling it, rather than to have a misnomer that it's a sequel. After all, the setting is now back in 15th century Thailand with totally new characters, with Jaa playing Tien, a man of royal lineage who's trying to avenge the death of his parents and entire household under the hands of rival warlords, and a masked man who delivered the killing blow to his dad. The first half of the movie had him learn from a band of bandits called the Garuda Wing Cliff, where a number of highly skilled exponents teach him all there is to know about their respective fields. I remembered having read somewhere that there's supposed to be some fusion of dance and martial arts, which didn't transpire in this film as far as I can tell (the dance/action sequence here doesn't make the cut), so it might be left for the next movie instead.
Compared to the other Tony Jaa movies, you can see that the production values here have been ramped up tremendously.Techniques have also matured, and gone are the repetitive playbacks. But that doesn't mean you're going to lose out, because like any self-respecting martial arts film, the camera stays still when it should be and at a sane distance away to capture all the action comfortably, and the editing doesn't cut in and mess up the sequence.
While the filmmaker in Tony Jaa would have matured with this outing (he co-directed this), his maturity as a martial artist on film is now without a doubt. We only get flashes of his Muay Thai when it calls for some close combat involving elbows and knees right smack in the kisser, otherwise we see Jaa as a more complete martial arts practitioner with the employment of a vast array of weapons, from swords to three-section-staffs, and a host of recognizable kung-fu moves, one which also pays homage to the Drunken Fists, and I applaud Jaa's rendition of it too. As for the revered elephant, you know it's never far behind, and there's one thrilling battle atop the large mammal, with Dan(ce) Chupong no less, albeit hidden behind a mask.
Ong Bak 2 picked up very slowly, and spent significant time developing the back story of Jaa's Tien. And unfortunately, I do admit unabashedly that I was waiting for action sequence one after another, and those in the same boat will have to be patient. For action junkies, your appetite will only be satiated in the last act of the film, where it's vintage Jaa as he dishes out punishment, and receives much of the same in return. I detested the ending which wrapped everything up so conveniently (I don't buy the Karma bit), or left subplots such as the romantic angle as something to be dwelled upon later (though I believe romance never really was an issue at all in Jaa's movies), leaving doors wide open for another film.
Perhaps I should reserve my judgement of it until the next movie completes the story? So at this moment, we can still enjoy what Tony Jaa has prepared for action fans worldwide a showcase that he's not just all about Muay Thai, but a bona fide action hero who's the real deal, crafting a myriad of incredible fight sequences that would still leave your mouth gaping wide open. -
Dragon_Eye_Morrison9 April 2009Tony Jaa is back in his first directorial effort (co-directing to be more specific) and the man delivers everything you would expect from a solid martial arts flick, and then some more.
The spiritual sequel to Ong Bak is quite an ambitious film, showing a wide diversity of fighting styles, using ancient thai history as the background. Jaa has certainly done his homework, because the movie has a strong old school HK vibe, but with a crude and gritty look. The plot is pretty much your standard martial arts/shaw bros 101 premise: hero takes revenge of his fallen comrades/family and so on, he begins as a weak victim to transform into a kick-ass machine. Nothing that any respectable MA movie aficionado haven't seen before, but the movie does it right and believable enough to engage the viewer. Not a complex story, but the motivations of the characters are convincing enough to move things on.
The fight sequences are effective, never repetitive and quite intense. I mean, if you can't enjoy a movie that has everything from crocodile fights to ninjas, samurais, elephants, people fighting like crows and leopards, a guy that throws daggers and another guy that uses explosives then you might want to report back to mother ship, because the goods of this planet are just too much for you. The abrupt ending, while anti-climatic, doesn't kill the mood of the film.
Far better from what anyone could expect, no idea why this go trashed by some people. Is no classic but it's a perfectly decent time waster. Which is more from what it can be say about other movies stuffing multiplexes these days. -
bob the moo26 July 2009Normally I would open with a plot summary when I write a review – not always but a lot of the time. With Ong Bak 2 I'm not sure I can be bothered or even that I should be because the plot here is so thin and so uninvolving that it is hardly worth the text. Essentially a child is rescued by pirates and grows up to be a great fighter, robbing and killing as they do. However when memories are triggered of his past he sets out for revenge , bringing secrets out into the open. In fairness, in those last two sentences I have made it sound more interesting than it actually is because I have suggested there is a flow to the narrative whereas in actuality the film is two of three "stages" that just suddenly move between one and the other. It is remarkably basic and, in terms of plot, remarkably poor. It isn't helped either by the fact that the entire film has a very serious dark tone to it – making it almost a weighty revenge tragedy. Now, I have no problem with that in theory but the problem here is that it doesn't do anything to justify that tone, nor does it do much to make it fit.
It really needed the characters to be engaging and real for the audience to care but there are no characters to talk about. Amazingly even the main character of Tiang is poorly developed. A massive part of this is the small amount of dialogue in the film – indeed by the time you have read to the bottom of this review you will have read more words than are spoken in this film. Of course silent films could still make a plot a character so it is not the end of the world but it does hurt the film because with a weak plot and weak characters the lack of dialogue is even more telling. Fortunately the one saving grace of the film fills the vast majority of the running time – the action. Aside from the "sombre" moments between scenes there are plenty of great action sequences involving weapons of all types. They are impressive and quite exciting at times and the only rider I would put on that is that they are not as much "fun" as the action has been in some of Jaa's other films. That said, it is worth seeing the film for the action alone – which, when you think about it, is just as well.
In terms of Jaa himself one really has to wonder what he is doing with his career because if films are to be his thing moving forward, then why does he appear to be going backwards in all of the aspects this involves excepting the action? In his previous films I have noted he is not very comfortable with lines and that any comic moment escapes him. Here it feels like those working with him have just given up totally and have allowed him to do little other than fight – he barely has a line in the film and any "plot/character development" stuff is done by the child playing his character while Jaa himself looks into a fire in a "remembering" pose. It is weird but it is part of the reason the film doesn't engage as much as I had hoped – because the main character is little other than a stunt man, albeit a very good stunt man. I'm sure fans will hate me for that and not see my point but the thing is, if he is going to continue making films in Thailand (far less films that can perform abroad) then he needs more than the impressive martial arts skills he has. He needs good vehicles, he needs to work on his many weaknesses as an actor and he needs to have a supporting cast that can fill the gaps that he cannot (such as in Ong Bak). At the moment Ong Bak 2 just looks like they are happy to film him fighting and leave it at that, which I think is a real shame because this only makes for great action – not a great film. Although he did a good job directing the film in some regards, this is probably a mistake because he cannot do anything about his own failings as a performer.
Ong Bak 2 is a technically brilliant martial arts film with plenty for the weapons fan to love. However as a film it is really quite poor thanks to a thin plot, little dialogue and even less in the way of characters. The action makes it worth seeing but even fans will be hoping for a bit of a better product built around this. I continue to pay out to import Jaa's films because he is great at what he does but I hope that he can improve in other areas to make better total films rather than this type of thing again. -
gogul117 April 2009Many a film has had it's fair share of problems but I doubt many films show that so obviously as ONG BAK 2. The comparison to the first is null and void as it is a completely different movie from ONG BAK. I suspect it only has the title so that western audiences will be interested in seeing the movie as the first was so successful. So what do we have? A period movie set many centuries before the first film and is focused around a very troubled time in Thai history where the country was at war with itself. Tony plays Teean, a young nobleman who is sent away by his father to be taught traditional dance at a school while he tries to fend off an opposing army who is attempting to take over his kingdom. Sadly all isn't as it should be and his parents are betrayed, killed and he is left to fend for himself. He is soon sold into slavery and when he does not cooperate with his captors he is thrown into a crocodile pit to fight for entertainment. Luckily though a band of pirates come to plunder and rescue him after witnessing his raw talent for survival. He is then taught many forms of martial arts by the pirates and displays a huge talent in different fighting styles including kung fu and weapons. I won't give too much away after that but what is clear is that as a first directorial debut Tony bit off way more than he could chew. Plot wise the film begins to go shaky at the 50 minute mark, opting instead to go nuts on fighting sequences rather than tie the plot down. It soon becomes apparent that while being so into the fighting Tony pushes the plot aside and the film becomes almost illegible to understand at points. The film then began to go grossly over budget causing the production company to put pressure on Tony to get it back in line and he soon cracked. It was reported in Thailand that Tony then decided, after almost destroying his friendship with choreographer and mentor Pannai, to disappear in the middle of production. Some of the rumours circulated were that he joined a monastery to practice black magic (doubtful) and that he had retreated to a cave to pray and meditate. He returned after a short while and made a tearful apology to the Thai public on TV vowing to finish what he had started. So what was the outcome? A sumptuous period film with fantastic cinematography and visuals but a serious lack of identity. The final third act is almost non existent, kidnapped by a massive over the top and spectacular action sequence. The film really needed to be wrapped up though and they managed to tack on an almost "to be continued" ending hoping to carry on the plot and hopefully drag back some credability that was lost in production. But I will say that this is a far cry from ong bak and tum yum goong, something I wasn't expecting and it's all the better for it. Tony wows with the mixed martial arts he trained so hard to perfect for the film. He pays homage to many of his heroes like Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan in some of the fight sequences including a drunken master set piece thats pretty brutal compared to Jackie's style. It lacks a lot of the acrobatics of his previous two outings but replaces them with intricate choreography and brutal weaponry. I was worried after tum yum goong that he may begin to run out of ideas and rely on previous success to sell the flick but he is clearly willing to step up to the plate and be far more ballsy than I gave him credit for. I wish they could have finished the movie properly or handed directing over to someone who had more experience because now we will have to wait for ONG BAK 3 (apparently its been agreed) to seek the real ending as I feel I cannot fairly review the film until then. But on the whole as long as you can forgive the shoddy plot just sit back and watch some real eye candy. The visuals and martial arts are better than any film that has come from Thailand already. I just hope this doesn't put people off of watching the third when it's released...
-
ebiros22 February 2012I'm new to Thai films, but I find some to be of high production value with excellent story. Ong Bak 2 fits this bill.
I was intrigued to see this film because at first it seemed to be a period piece about certain point in Thai history. So I was eager to learn much about it. Then I came to understand that this is actually a martial arts film. This was my first exposure to Tony Jaa.
I was impressed to say the least of all the action,the exciting story, and Jaa's screen presence. The movie is beautifully shot with new kind of exotic looks that's never been explored in western films.
If this is the direction Thai films are taking, their future is bright, and I would like to see more movies of this kind to come from Thailand. -
Buddy-5112 February 2012Set in 15th Century Thailand, the subtitled "Ong Bak: 2" brings little that is new to the martial-arts genre - but a barrel load of impressive fight scenes and an authentic look make it worthwhile viewing for the aficionado. It's the oldie about a young boy who is trained to become a righteous warrior, standing up for the innocent and the helpless against a cruelly oppressive regime.
As noted, there isn't much in the way of storytelling, dialogue and characterization to distinguish "Ong Bak: 2" from the countless other films in this category, but the battle scenes are impressively staged and mounted, with a brutality that, while it makes them hard to watch at times, seems an accurate reflection of the era in which it's set. Moreover, directors Panna Rittikrai and Tony Jaa (who plays the lead role) never feel the need to prettify the setting, offering up a screen full of snaggle-toothed, matted-locked extras to go along with all the muck and mud.
Tien, ace martial arts fighter and tamer of elephants, takes on a half-a-dozen opponents at a time, slicing-and-dicing and karate-chopping them into the dust, only to have them rise again to face a second, third, even fourth humiliating go-round at his punishing hands. It's 100% absurd and just about everything a die-hard martial arts fan could wish for from such a film. -
rnanakul14 December 2008I'll be blunt, this movie left me upset an unfulfilled. The action sequences were amazing, and showed off all of Tony Jaa's phenomenal skills in both weapons, and acrobatics. However, over directing, bad pacing, a meandering story, and over production destroyed this movie. I realize that this is Tony Jaa's first directing job and he had a lot of pressure to turn out a good product but that doesn't mean that basic directing should be thrown out. Every scene in the movie was too dramatic and too over the top. What made Ong Bak 1 so great was its simple story line and directing. The predecessor felt more raw and real. Ong Bak 2 has neither elements and what you get is a jumbled mess that overloads your senses to the point of boredom. Half way through the movie I got tired of seeing water droplets and different zoom levels. It hurt to watch after a while because the directing took away from enjoying the fight sequences.
Bad writing and pacing are hallmarks of Thai movies, and this was no different. Ong Bak 1 had a very simple story line of a man just trying to get back a relic. In the process he makes friends who change and develop with him. In the end, there's a triumphant ending and we all go home happy. In this movie, the story is so unorganized you don't know what's going on. Long scenes are spent to develop characters, but nothing is ever resolved. They spent 10-15 minutes developing the female lead, only to conclude it with some eye contact and him running off. Nothing is resolved and plot holes are a plenty. The ending *spoiler alert* is him just dying. After 90 minutes of fighting, he just dies, and we are taught a lesson about how not to let revenge consume us. That's it. The ending scene is a 20 spectacle on par with Tony Jaa's spiral stair sequence scene from "The Protector". However this just randomly ends with him getting killed. The story and ending left me upset, and unfulfilled. Tony Jaa again tried to do too much and ended up with too little.
The production in this movie is epic. There are costumes, settings, and sequences that are a feast for the eyes. They also cost a lot of money and were completely unneeded. I know that Tony Jaa wanted to show off the splendor of Thai culture but a lot of the extravagant scenes did not add to the story and were a waste. The production in this movie easily explains on why this movie ran out of money so many times. Did they really need fake fire and CGI for a grand palace? No, they didn't they needed a coherent story line. Simply put, they should have spent money on other things besides sets and costumes, maybe something like a complete movie.
Many of us watch these movies for the martial arts and action sequences. So how good were they? It was honestly a mixed bag. His over directing really takes away from this experience. The directing didn't allow me to enjoy his acrobatic leaps and kicks, which is the fun of action movies. Tony Jaa's vision was to create a movie that combines martial arts from around the world to create an ultimate fighter. The way they present the scenes make all the different styles distinct. Tiang explicitly switches from one style to another, and every time he does, the directing makes it apparent. As a result, the action feels very forced. Tony Jaa, although very good at his new styles, he seems very uncomfortable when using different styles that are not Muay Thai. The best action sequences, and the times he feels the most comfortable, are when he is using Muay Thai. As a martial artist who has studied martial arts from around the world also, I combine these different arts into my own style. As a result, what I do feels natural to me and looks natural in the way I fight. In separating all the fighting styles, it took away from showing off Tony Jaa's true skill, made the movie feel a little forced. They are all still amazing sequences and he a great martial artist but it could have been better with a different approach.
All in all Ong Bak 2 was a disappointment for me. The bad story and horrible pacing (sequences of stories and action were not connected most of the time, leaving you just annoyed) really did this movie in for me. Furthermore, over directing and over production made things worse by creating an over budget, uncompleted movie. The action sequences although entertaining, lacked the tension and drive of his previous movies. They felt like scenes that were there just to keep the movie going and the character had no really purpose in doing them. I can only hope that Tony Jaa's next endeavor goes back to basics and makes something good again. If you read down below, it's a summary of the rest of the movie that was cut. You'll see scenes from the trailer that didn't make it in the movie, namely him in the white outfit. Read it if you want to understand what Tony Jaa's entire vision was. This could have been a better movie if it had been entirely shot but, not that much better. Either way this movie is going to make a lot of money and a lot of people will see it. He'll still be rich and famous so I really can't feel all that bad for the. -
rajeshnaidu_tony5 April 2009The movie is wonderful, to the point and did not mess-up up with too much story and dialogs.
The movie shows tony ja's wish to cover the major martial art skills such as Chinese kung fu, Japanese Samurai, Ninja, Muay Thai, Drunken kungfu etc.,
The fight sequences are brilliant, rough and the art of Drunken fighting is shown perfectly as you will see the real essence unlike that of older movies which have portrayed it as a funny martial art. tony ja's love for elephants is obvious(Thailand's national animal).
overall 9/10 (-1 if there is no sequel) one can obviously see that even though the movie is tony ja's first direction it is very maturely taken and it's sure that it makes you feel like there should be some more at the end but The movie is unfinished as tony and the producers had some unknown clashes behind the scenes.
Yet the movie is full of brilliant fights and you will surely be satisfied while expecting for a sequel. -
sraweber36927 April 2011I liked movie which is amazing for someone who never watches martial arts films. I was amazed at the level of production value plus very good direction of the action sequences. I really don't know anything about martial arts so I cannot comment on the various types used in this movie. I admit the story is a common one a young boy is out to avenge his parents death a mentor saves him and the boy matures into a master warrior who is driven to avenge his the wrongs brought upon his family.
The movie has great set designs and I love the look of feudal Thailand with rustic villages in deep forest. All art direction is a step above and rivals many Hollywood films. I also liked the historical setting and I could tell much research was done in costuming and bringing that period to life. The only drawback was there could have been a little more character development. I would like some more background on Tiens spiritual growth and beliefs.
Grade B -
swampfoxx-16 December 2008With a storyline reminiscent of Japanese video games and Samurai classics, it is nice to see this genre back on the big screens. The action sequences muscle out the storyline a bit, but they remain quite spectacular to watch. Tony Jaa clearly left a piece of his soul on the celluloid for the next generation to remember him by. The scenes are beautifully framed, full of color and contrast. All I felt that was missing was a control pad between my fingers and the freedom to take the character around the village to search for hidden treasure.
If the movie leaves you scratching your head a little at the end, you are not alone. However I suspect that it implies that a sequel is in the works and I am in favor for that. It is great seeing the epic martial art films back on the big screen, with a devoted cast ensuring the audience that they will get their money's worth. It is the best film in this genre that I have seen in a good long while. -
kosmasp6 June 2020If you watch this with the first one in mind, you may be surprised to say the least. Because apart from the title and Tony Jaa as leading man, there is nothing much this has in common with the other movie. Well maybe the elephant too, sort of. But this plays in a totally different era. And Tony's character is young for the first third of it.
As we don't see him for quite some time, there will be quite a lot of time where you will have to "wait" for the action too. Having said, when the action starts, it's quite mesmerizing. And the end ... battle is quite the things to behold. Then again there is also the crocodile scene, which is set near the start to give the viewer something. Though it may be the highlight of the movie for some too though. The ending may seem sudden and quite unsatisfying ... which makes sense - because Part 3. -
thebogofeternalstench29 November 2009Well, what a let down.
A very unoriginal storyline-young kid has parents killed by nasty bad guy, leaving him orphaned, and is taken in as a child by some bearded dude who teaches him how to fight...boy becomes man and avenges parents death....but the twist is dun dun dun...the man who took him in and taught him martial arts is the masked warrior who sliced his dads throat all those years ago.....
Ong Bak 1 was fantastic, I loved it, my friends loved it. I remember we all went down to the park after it finished trying to copy Tony Jaas moves and obviously failing, busting our groin areas trying to do those long stretch kicks and just looking like idiots. WE all walked home in pain and were disappointed we couldn't do the high knee kicks....
As for Ong Bak 2, which is a 'prequel', its just rubbish. It lacked the flow and pacing of Ong Bak 1. THere was no humour which in my opinion made Ong Bak 1 even better.
I was sorely disappointing with Ong Bak 2...the ending is just stupid.
See it for yourself but don't expect much. What a disappointment. -
chi_town_fed4 August 2018Mad kudos to a martial arts film set in muck and mire. The grittiness of this film sets it apart from others. The hero and most of the cast look like they need a shower throughout the movie, which adds an authentic feel to this film versus fighters wearing fully pressed, spotless wardrobes.
Writing is great. The lead character is developed from credits to credits and continues to evolve to the very end of the movie. However, the villain is a cliche and too over the top for my taste, which caused me to reduce my rating.
The fight scenes, especially at the end, are phenomenal! OMG! This guy is good. His skill rivals some of the best I've ever seen. Yes. I know it is choreographed, but you still need the skill to pull it off. I'd hate to fight this guy, especially if he is in a bad mood.
I didn't care for the mysticism, which only served to distract from the story; but I accept it is likely a cultural thing and try to look past it.
ONG Bak 2 is an action packed emotionally thrilling film that forces viewers to relate to the characters. You even feel strongly about the leader (good or bad) of the clan, especially at the end. The tragedy in this movie makes you feel the anguish of the main character. The last fight scene is beyond climatic as the lead characters anguish comes to a head. It is very powerful as it comes without the ridiculous ploy of people running up walls and jumping into trees. Then came the elephant . . . -
angelsfang2 April 2009The only spoilers in this review is regarding the moves he uses throughout the movie. There will be NO plot spoilers.
First of all this is more of a prelude to the original Ong Bak. If you're reading this to decide whether to watch it or not, the answer is quite simply YES. It is difficult to compare with Ong Bak because it's slightly different, for example the entire movie takes place in the forest and not any cities or urban areas, and he uses a lot of weapons and different fighting styles than just the same Muay Thai elbows and knees. This time Tony Jaa himself is the director, and he has teamed up yet again with the excellent Panna Rittikrai. And the result is some seriously good cinema. The editing and cinematography is superb. Fans of the original Ong Bak may feel a bit disgruntled as the storyline doesn't seem to completely fit together, but don't let the finer details distract you from what is a fantastic directorial debut from Mr.Jaa.
Now I would like to take a moment and talk about the fighting in Ong Bak 2. That Tony Jaa is one cunning customer. I remember he said his childhood idol was Bruce Lee, and you can sometimes be reminded of Lee's style especially when he pulls a "WHOAAA" face after he just smashed someone. But why is he cunning you ask? Well after filming Tom Yum Goong, he seemed to have disappeared off the radar for quite some time. Well during this time he was getting busy traveling around and studying other people's martial arts! In Ong Bak 2, he pulls off signature moves from other famous stars, here are some off the top of my head: Jet Li (when he swung a fire hose around like a whip), Donnie Yen (flying spinning armbar), Japanese sword styles (especially Seiza, art of sword drawing defence), Shaolin styles, Kali knife fighting (quite authentic as well), even a rather rare scene from a Chinese movie where when the opponent thrusts his sword at him, he uses his own sword hilt and "captures" the enemy sword, effectively disarming him. He pulls off all these moves with incredible proficiency and smoothness. I wouldn't quite call it plagiarizing, as some of them are so obvious that it looks more like a homage.
Now, about his direction and acting. Again, I think Tony is very smart in that he plays to his own advantages. In his previous movies, whenever he opened his mouth he usually sounded wooden and dull. So in Ong Bak 2, he has very little dialogue, and lots of butt kicking. But seriously though, it really is a great debut for him. The story was good, the scenes well edited and the fights extremely stylish and tightly shot. He even had the audacity to pull off a shock ending, and never did I expect to feel emotion while watching a Tony Jaa film, not just adrenaline but emotion. The ending leaves you yearning for more.
In conclusion, it is a MUST BUY for any fan of Tony Jaa or martial arts collections. The harshest of critics will call it a simple movie incomparable to Hollywood productions, but looking back at the Jackie Chan and Jet Li movies, at least Ong Bak 2 doesn't have as much cheese and cringeworthy dialogue. I dread the day Tony pairs up with a hip hop star or some smart mouth pretty boy and run through the usual stereotypical humor of cultural clashes. -
mick-pearce28 March 2009I am a huge fan of Jaa's films ong bak and warrior king, as some thing of a fan of martial arts films i was pleased with originality that these brought such as the repeated scenes from other angles as with ong bak.
I had heard that this movie had ground to a halt due to production problems so when I got the chance to see it i was pleased.
A fractured start opens this but this is explained during further acts in the film. Unfortunately during his hiatus Jaa or the film producers seem to have watched some of the seminal martial art movies such as jackie chans drunken master and snake in the eagles shadow and some of jet li's original work. This is not to say to the movie isn't fun but it does lack the originality of the Jaa movies I've mentioned before.
What is new is the use of weaponry in this film but I must say that Jaa seems uncomfortable with it, the editing where he uses it seems full of snap shots and fast forwarding. The hand to hand scenes are however superb.
The final 20 minutes or so are high quality and I would recommend any fan to watch for this reason alone but on a whole I expected better.
It would be nice to see Tony Jaa in a buddy movie with a more main stream action star, (I would like to say Jet Li), to see what the result would be but I get the unfortunate feeling that it won't happen. -
The action is phenomenal as expected, Tony Jada delivers the goods like he always has been. He takes a lot of bumps again and the stunt work is amazing, though people who have seen his previous work and expect the same will be a bit disappointed, there isn't much left from the former fanciness of stunts, for example this time around we don't see amazing slides under sharp objects, vehicles, dodging through narrow alleys , breaking motorcycle helmets with a knee or jumping off exploding glass walls anymore.
Instead tony Jada presents us with an huge array of different martial art forms, gone are the days of straight Muay Thai action.
That seems to be a let down for some fans but at the end of the day it's all about giving a good show and hell how Mr. Jaa delivers this time around.
We see a vast array of Chinese, Japanese and Western styles of martial arts. For an instance we get a showcase of drunken boxing(a Jackie Chan homage, no doubt), bits of Judo, Japanese sword fighting, Chinese weapon styles, Chinese Gung Fu(various styles) and of course Muay Thai. These are for show, mind you and shouldn't be judged from point like the effectiveness(why are those guys running into his fists all the time?) It's a movie and not a K1 bout or a test of might, that should be considered.
But what really impressed me is the art direction, every character shown is unique in its own way, countless goons that run into Tony Jaa's character and get beaten come off in such diversity.
We have sword wielding ninjas, angry tribal men, a vampire woman(I am serious), a fighter who is a crow/man hybrid(what the hell) , angry pirates, shiny royal guards et cetera. You get the picture, under normal circumstances this would be considered as cheesy and flamboyant but here it works, they are presented with such style and flashiness you got to love em.
Particularly because all these random characters are a reverence of the good old days of shaw brothers kung fu movies. Those silly characters are just fun to look at. They bring back memories of times long forgotten and I am glad that somebody has the guts to show what was necessary to make kung fu a piece of art again, we loved the DRUNKEN MASTER, THE ONE ARMED BOXER, THE YELLOW HELL OF THE SHAOLIN and THE MASTER OF THE FLYING GUILLOTINE(just to name a few) for their memorable characters.
That brings me to the point, the costumes are really well done, nothing seemed to look cheap or cheesy, that shows what can be done with such a little budget(compared to the big studios we have in the west), Hollywood should learn from that. the wigs looked a bit off from time to time but, you know it wasn't terrible.
now lets get to the story, well don't expect much here, it's not the Manchurian candidate, or the firm or something in that vein. It's a fantasy martial arts action movie. the story is very basic, it's a revenge story. a noble whose parents got violently murdered seeks out the culprit in order to avenge his parents and claim his rightful place on the throne. nothing fancy here, though this movie is a historic fantasy movie, we will get glimpses of Thai culture .
I didn't expect a take on Shakespeare anyway and I sincerely hope that most people who like these kind of movies don't expect something outstanding in the dialog or story department for that matter. Of course some directors try to sugarcoat their movies with overdone dreadful artistic visuals and poorly written meta plots, such as hero or house of the flying daggers, don't get me wrong I like Jet Li and Tony Leung but I am not fan of this westernized martial arts movie concept. more show then face value. This movie suffers in some parts from the same concept, slow mo raindrops etc. and some weird meta plots, it's certainly a bit annoying though in defense of the movie it isn't nearly as overdone and distracting as in Zhang Yimou 's movies. Thus I can easily live with that.
Dialogs? What dialog? Tony Jaa speaks only a very few lines in the entire movie (maybe two or three i can't remember), the rest consists of glares, gasps, war cries and grunts. The acting wasn't really terrible, the actions of the character spoke for itself and I have seen far worse, It wasn't so important after all.
It's still miles ahead of what the infamous Chuck Norris can deliver.
It's certainly different from Mr. Jaa's previous work. He also gets major credit from me because he directed it and he coordinated the stunts. A lot of Sweat and Heart invested into this flick.
Of course it boils down to one thing, was it an enjoyment? Totally, I enjoyed almost every minute of it. some flaws and things that I personally don't like(overdone visuals like slow motion raindrops etc.) but still very enjoyable.
7/10 -
Ong Bak 2: The Beginning is an exercise in noise & color which leaves the viewer scratching his head & at times his brain. What did I watch? Even the most thematically starved martial arts films will have a fight or two to recommend it but wow, what a paucity of ideas we have here. Although boasting a moving dance number, no amount of story manipulation can invigorate this tired tale of revenge & retribution.
-
konya-s1 May 2009I just saw this movie, and I completely amazed by it. Tony Jaa is one of the most talented, most gifted martial artist in the entire planet, the best since Bruce Lee or the young Jackie Chan. When I saw the Ong bak (2003) I was literally went nuts. The fighting scenes were more then awesome, that was something new, something that you didn't see every day. Then came the Protector. More and even better action, more fury, and more fun. "Okay." - I wondered - "How can they top this?" I mean you saw Tony Jaa kickin' ass, and kickin' more ass, what's next? Go back to the golden ages of martial art flicks and see how an instant classic movie done. Now you have Tony Jaa as a director and a star. The movie takes years and years ago, and it's about a young martial artist. The camera work is superb, the soundtrack is fantastic and the most important thing: the fighting scenes are absolutely nuts! I mean damn great! If you saw all of the Bruce Lee-films, and Jet Li's entire filmography, you still didn't see anything like this before. There are sword fights, fights with bare hands and elbows and there are kicks, punches, cuts, THIS MOVIE HAS EVERYTHING! The final fight scene is just EPIC, you will cheer and scream, and you want to see it again. You will have a geekgasm, my friend!
-
ChungMo5 April 2009Tony Jaa still impresses with his action skills. It would not be a stretch to say he is the best action star who can really do the action around right now. If it's watching people who can really move and fly around the screen (or run on top of a herd of moving elephants) that floats your boat, this film is not going to disappoint.
A shell of a story is about the son of a Thai general on the run from a murderous leader after the slaughter of his family. The boy is adopted by a band of "pirates" and grows up to be their second in command as well as an unstoppable martial artist. Of course he's set on revenge.
Beautiful photography, set design and production values make this an entertaining film despite the fact that it's really a set of impressive action scenes strung together. Tony Jaa's character speaks very, very little in the film and most of the other characters are visually interesting but emotionally very sketchy. Occasionally the film veers into strange places, the elephant herd scene and another scene with what seems to be a fanged beast woman. Jaa likes to have his characters roar with animal sounds at times. He also is clearly paying homage to other great martial art films but with all his talents I would really like Jaa to forge his own style instead of constantly imitating the past. This was also a problem with his previous film. The times he sticks with Thai martial arts are some of the best in the film.
With a cliffhanger ending, there seems a sequel in the works. Jaa's direction is assured and the film has a good style but I hope he works on the story for the next one. Recommended. -
neostjames7 April 2009The first Ong Bak was good because
a) North American audiences hadn't really been exposed to Thai martial arts and the movie showcased the more violent aspects in a very acrobatic way.
b) they kept the story really simple: get the head of the statue back, no matter what.
The audience cheered and rooted for Tony because his character seemed like a nice guy that was just trying to do the right thing and who doesn't want to get behind that kind of guy.
Ong Bak 2 wasn't horrible like the other reviewer mentioned unless you were going into the theater thinking it was going to be Ong Bak 1 all over again. Kind of like Martial Arts meets Die Hard lol. This wasn't the case. Yes the movie is dim at times but obviously that's the way they wanted it to be for certain scenes and it certainly doesn't last long. It's got pretty good action but the story is the weakest link. It's not well thought out and maybe that's because Tony and his mentor wrote it.
It probably won't make it into your Top 10 list but that doesn't mean it can't help you kill some time :) -
In 1431, the Kingdom of Ayutthayan conquers the territory of Sukhothai expanding their lands to East. The noble Lord Siha Decho is betrayed by his Captain Rajasena and is murdered together with his wife. However their son Tien is saved by one loyal soldier and left alone in the woods. Later he is captured by slave traders but he is rescued by Chernang, the leader of a group of thieves from Garuda Wing. He learns martial arts and arms and becomes a leader of the thieves, but he leaves the gang seeking revenge against Rajasena.
"Ong Bak 2" is a good epic, with a non-original storyline but a magnificent choreography of fights and art direction. The plot is predictable but very entertaining, supported by the ability of Tony Jaa in martial arts, and the conclusion seems to be the beginning of an unnecessary sequel. My vote is eight.
Title (Brazil): "Ong-Bak 2" -
grandmastersik2 July 2009Action, action, action - isn't that all we really want from action/martial arts flicks?
As proved time and time again by poor, non-existent or just plain ridiculous story lines, we like to get motivated a little by a plot and characters, so that the action is so much the sweeter when it comes about.
Ong Bak 2 (a misnomer, perhaps?) certainly doesn't fall into the above category which has spoiled so many other titles, however, by the time it finishes, you'll probably be left wondering, "Isn't something missing?" And you'd be right - at least an extra hour of film!
Without risking ruining the viewing for anyone, by the time the characters and the story have fully developed, the film suddenly ends. Yeah, it could be argued that it was supposed to have, or that it was shoddily paving the way for a sequel, but for me, it felt like the closing of the second act of a martial arts epic, and by it just switching to the credits, I felt rightfully cheated.
Tony Jaa's a spectacle to watch as ever, the story's there, just not played out properly (unless some moron truly did truncate filming or cut the film in half) and the sets and action are all superb... but, well, I can't help but wonder: "Isn't something missing?" -
talon208121 February 2010I suppose the reviewer previous to me is right in some respects. The setting is good, and this film shows a lot of "culture". If you don't mind turning off the sound and reading subtitles, this could be a decent movie.
Now I don't have a problem with every movie made on a low budget, but the script-reading was absolutely horrible. The script-readers were doing the bare minimum of their job... just reading. The first Ong Bak was, in my opinion, one of the best martial arts films I've seen in the last 10 years, and the Protector was enjoyable, too. This film has nowhere near the same exciting action sequences.
The acting was forgivable, though not very good, if only not made to look even worse by the bad script. Yes, thats not a mistake... not only was the script-reading done as if they had 2 days to finish, but the script itself was bad to begin with. The whole film just feels very cheesy because of these things.
That said, the action is not bad, just not as good as his other more famous movies, and there were other redeemable things to the movie. Still, I will never be able to recommend anyone to see this. -
tedg13 January 2012I was directed to this because I am interested in cinematic choreography. From a practical perspective, that usually means martial arts.
Further, it means Asian films. But gee they sure get tedious after the first few unless there really is a master behind the camera. So I was sent to this. The idea was to skip the original because this one is directed by the performer himself.
I am struck by a truth discovered by other means: actors do acting, not filmmaking. They are instruments. A few understand how to act in a way that truly supports the intentions of the filmmaker, but the reality is that they are in different businesses. Often, the last person to understand the dynamics at work are the actors. An example is Harrison Ford in "Blade Runner." It probably is his best work as an actor, and he still today has no idea how he was as manipulated as much as his replicant character.
So when you put an actor in charge, you sometimes get interesting stuff, but rarely good films. And this guy is an acrobat, not an actor. What we end up with what you might expect if a brickmason decided he was an architect and made everything including the furniture out of bricks.
I was briefly part of a startup which would have been able to extract things like the movements of the Thai martial arts in this film and compare them to the few Hong Kong- produced fight moves. But it all just seemed the same smacking around to me.
Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.