The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day (2009) User Reviews (218)

Not quite what I had hoped for after 10 years, but good none the less

[cadillac20 · 7/10 · 1 November 2009]

For those of us who have been cult fans of the original, the last ten years have been a long ten. It was only a short while after the first film that they announced a sequel, but that sequel never came about. Then, finally, after all this time, here we are with All Saints Day, and it's a film that should entertain most, if not all fans. Unfortunately, it isn't quite the sequel I had hoped for.

Saints II picks up with the Saints having moved to Ireland after their vigilante spree throughout Boston. When a priest is killed in Boston, the Saints return to find the killer and take out everyone involved. The story soon opens up into a deeper plot about past sins coming back to haunt their characters.

All Saints Day continues the duologue slick, trigger happy style of the first film with rapid fire gun play, film homages, and snapfire duologue that is throughly entertaining. The gun play here is even more stylized, and it makes for some very entertaining action packed scenes that should please everyone who loved the first film. Most of the old cast has returned, and then there is the new cast, who bring some entertaining acting chops with them, mostly in the form of comic relief. Suffice to say, everything you liked about the first one is here, so if you were a fan of that film, you'll most likely love the sequel.

Unfortunately, All Saints Day isn't quite up to par with that first film. Where the first film had a natural flow to it, the sequel is somewhat disjointed, and the cast seems to try too hard. While everyone is real cool and funny, a lot of it seems to be too over the top, and after a while it begins to work against the film. Julie Benz and Clifton Collins Jr. try to make up for their first films counterparts, that being Wilem Defoe and David Della Rocco respectively, but are poor substitutes. Where these characters from the first one seemed to be very natural and perfect in their element, the new cast members seem to be trying to make up for a lack of said characters, and it shows. There are also several silly and useless scenes that, while creative, are out of place and could have very well been left out of the film. In particular is a dream sequence with a character from the first film and a scene with Julie Benz character as a cowgirl.

Fortunately, the end of the film is save by a fantastic climax headed by Billy Connely and Peter Fonda. Their scene at the end is some of the best written stuff of either of the films and these veteran actors bring all their chops to this film. Adding to this is a very pleasant bit part from a Boondock Saints favorite that should leave fans smiling as they leave the theater.

Saints II is a film for the fans, that's for sure. It may even encourage some to go see the first if they haven't seen it already, though this isn't all that likely. But, this is a very entertaining and decently written film that continues this great vigilante tale and may even lead to more. As fans, we can only hope to see more of the Saints in the future.

Creators couldn't make up their minds

[Primo84 · 5/10 · 13 November 2009]

Being a huge fan of the first film, it's kind of difficult to admit this, but The Boondock Saints: All Saints Day just fell short.

The major flaw with the original was that it was a Tarantino-esquire action spoof that was attempting to be serious. Complete with over the top shootout scenes, campy dialog, and insanely unrealistic situations, whether the creators knew it or not, the original Boondock Saints was never meant to be taken seriously. It was just a fun movie.

Anyway, about 15 minutes into this film, it seems as though Troy Duffy had realized this and decided to embrace what the first film should have always been: an entertaining, over-the-top, shoot 'em up flick.

Enter Julie Benz and the three detectives.

See, what made the three detectives from the first Saints funny was not the dimwitted, slapstick gimmick they had in this film, it was Willem Dafoe. It wasn't that they were THAT dumb, it was that Smecker was THAT good. The weird guy was better than the average joes could have ever dreamed to be, and laughs ensued.

In Boondocks 2, you have three actors who are trying way too damn hard to be funny, followed by Julie Benz trying to play a female Paul Smecker. These characters worked in the first film because they actually had a decent performance to play off of.

Don't get me wrong, Julie Benz is great on Dexter, but she was just god awful in this movie. They might as well have tried to pass off that Smecker had a sex change, and that he and Bloom were the same person. They say imitation is the highest form of flattery, but in this case, it was probably an insult. Also, the Southern Accent was just atrocious.

Aside from that, this film seemed to have expanded on what the original should have always been. There was more laughs, more action, and more blatantly forced accents. Hell, even the obvious replacement for Rocco wasn't half bad.

Dump every scene with Bloom, Greenly, Duffy, and Dolly, and you have yourself a sequel that nearly matches the original.

However, they were still in the movie, and they ruined it every time they were on screen.

5/10

The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day – "Bigger, Louder, Desperate"

[Fruit-Flix · 5/10 · 5 April 2010]

This whole movie feels forced, it is as though one of 'the saints' put a gun to the creators head and demanded a sequel.

The only people who are going to watch this are those who liked the original (which was a great niche action movie 8/10 stars). BSII fails to love up to the original in every way; interesting & entertaining characters are replaced with cheap & annoying ones; old gimmicks are simply rehashed; the leads look old & tired; recurring characters look lost & bewildered; and where the original BS story was simple, tight, & original, BS2's plot is overcomplicated and contrived.

There are some thrills and spills to be had in BSII, but it is difficult to watch something fall so far short from the quality of the original.

On the Fruit-Meter, BSII gets the "SULTANA (or RAISEN)' – The original grape was fresh and juicy, the sequel has lost all the original zesty flavours and has too many wrinkles.

I was very disappointed

[gharrett · 29 November 2009]

This movie definitely let me down. It wasn't taken seriously, even by the actors. I'm sure it was very fun to make and I might have even enjoyed it a little bit if I didn't know the original existed. Granted, the first is a very hard act to follow, but it could have been much better. The first half of the movie I wanted to walk out, though the second was somewhat redeeming it just wasn't enough. I think Troy Duffy should give me my money back and start making music again. He had a brilliant idea with the first one and got very lucky making it so good, the second it is clear he was just having a good time with the cast and basking in the nostalgia of the first. I'm sorry, but this movie just isn't good.

The Saints are back

[cooldoode23 · 7/10 · 20 October 2009]

I just saw the movie tonight at the advanced screening. If you're a Boondock fan, this movie is everything you'd expect it to be. It was awesome. Cant wait to see the third one, if there is one.

To be honest, I think the editing sucked in the movie cos at some points, there was no transition. Also, the director should have considered making a 2 hour 15 minute movie instead of the 1 hour 57 minutes. But it was good regardless. The movie was well written and had a lot of humor. The actors did a great job. The cinematographer was good too. The only thing I didn't like was the editing.

I don't want to spoil the movie by discussing about it. But I will be back after it releases on the 30th. Hope it gets released nationwide so that more people will know about the Saints.

The saints are comin

[C-Younkin · 6/10 · 27 October 2009]

Don't let the lack of promotion for "Boondock Saints 2" fool you. The fans are clamoring for it. The plot picks up in Ireland where brothers Connor (Sean Patrick Flannery) and Murphy (Norman Reedus) McManus are hiding out after the events of the last movie. A priest shot in Boston, in the same style the brothers are known for, makes them the prime suspects. Writer/ director Troy Duffy is going for the old-school Charles Bronson-style vigilante movie, and achieves something pretty close to that. He even goes with that cool voice-over quote you hear in trailers all the time, "they wanted to call them out, there's just one problem, it worked." Then cue the hard-rock. The movies villain is Concezio Yakavetta (Judd Nelson), son of the mob boss the brothers killed in the first film and he wants revenge. An FBI Agent (Julie Benz) is brought in to investigate the murders, taking over for Willem Dafoe as the one cop who can imagine in great detail (which of course is done in flashback) exactly how each murder went down. There is also some back-story about Papa McManus (Billy Connelly) that eventually ties into the plot. Duffy is eager to please, going with guns-blazing, lots of tough-talk, heart-beat style splicing, a lot of slow-mo (a naked shower scene, gun fights, a sexy chick's legs just to name a few), cool sunglasses, religious overtones and childish jokes (gay gags, naked ass), but his writing doesn't really crack between lulls of action and he has less stylistic discipline than Michael Bay.

The whole thing is like bland Tarantino (guys playing with guns, killing bad-guys, sums it up). Basically the fans get a chance to oooh and ahhh over familiar characters (while creating some new ones), although most of the supporting players are gratingly stupid for the interest of cheap laughs. It's mindless fun though and for the most part, Duffy captures that. The cast is all game, with Julie Benz being the sultry, fun to watch highlight and Nelson chewing scenery. Clifton Collin's wild-eyed Mexican sidekick character would be an example of grating though. If you loved the first one, you'll love this. If you were indifferent to it, then you'll be like me. And if you hated it, look elsewhere. Either way, it looks like a third movie is coming.

Pretty Good

[Appletonian · 7/10 · 26 October 2009]

To tell you the truth, I was no big fan of the first Boondock Saints. I thought the violence was gratuitous, the plot stupid, and the dialogue boring. After watching this one, I can confidently say that Troy Duffy has matured and made a film with much more quality. Sure, the over-the-top violence is still here, and so is the naughty language, and even the crude jokes, but now, the plot and the dialogue seem so much more mature.

That said, there are somethings that could be improved in this film. I think this movie would have worked better as a 90 minute action flick, but it was actually pushing the two hour line, and I believe that is a bit too long.

However this is nitpicking. The Boondock Saints II is a funny, cool, action packed, and maybe even though provoking look into the actions of two vigilantes.

Forced...

[elizgomez · 2/10 · 26 October 2013]

The characters and jokes seem forced... The special agent seems to be written to be kooky, but is nothing like the spectacular character Defoe played, and comes across as annoying. Almost bad enough to be laughable - hard to watch.The plot does not seem to be cohesive. A very few characters in the movie come across as believable - many say their lines, but the words sound odd... I am working hard to write anything else about this movie to make ten lines since I really thought it was awful and there are only so many ways you can talk about how terrible the lines, characters and lack of plot are. I am rarely a fan of sequels and this movie proves exactly why I am hesitant to watch subsequent offerings on good movies.

I got what I wanted as a fan. Others might not.

[thedarkwolf333 · 8/10 · 21 November 2009]

I am an avid fan of the original movie. While the concept of vigilantism has been around for decades in film, it was never communicated in such a way. The original movie was both entertaining, and made certain statements about society. After all, isn't the first purpose of film to entertain, and the second to create a message? If the first movie focused on the message, the second seemed to focus more on the entertainment. I'm OK with that. I already know what the McManus boys are all about. Still, it was refreshing to see Il Duce's beginning as a killer, even catching a glimpse of the first version of the gun vest.

I was very skeptical of Clifton Collins Jr., thinking that he would simply be a stand-in for Rocco. He wasn't. He had his own personality, although I would have liked to have seen him involved in what the boys were doing on a more personal level. It was like he was waiting for them to come along just so he would have an excuse to kill mobsters.

The humor, slow-motion gunfights, and light-hearted moments were back. During the first half, I sometimes felt the humor needed to be left behind and the serious tone needed to come into play, but the second half delivered that aspect very well, so it balances out in the end.

Julie Benz. Hmmmm. Attractive, intelligent, fun. But the southern accent is so thick I had a hard time focusing on anything else.

I would like to make a special note of how ridiculous it is for someone to dual-wield Desert Eagles, even if they have compensators attached.

Still, none of my complaints stopped me from enjoying the movie. I watched it for what it is. An over the top-low(er) budget film that was written to please fans of the original. I took it for what it is, and I think I'm better off for it.

Many people criticize Troy and the films themselves, some going so far as to say fans should go kill themselves. The internet, where everyone thinks their opinion is fact, and everyone is a hardass. If you don't like the movies, fine, but please, don't insult the intelligence of the fans. Liking something that you don't doesn't make us any less intelligent than you. If you want to pick on someone, pick on the Twilight fans that think those movies are a real representation of love and vampire mythology.

I hear Troy can be a bit of a douche. Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. What isn't true, is that the movies do not rip off of Tarantino. I like Tarantino's work, but he was not the first person to do the flashback narrative, dual wielding of pistols, slow motion gunfights, etc. etc. That's like saying Halo was the first good shooter. All movies borrow elements from one another. They're called themes and archetypes.

All in all, an enjoyable film that gives the fans a taste of what they've been missing for ten years. The editing is a little spotty at times, and not everything hits the right beat, but simply to see the boys in action again was enough to make me smile and laugh out loud, and once again, isn't that what movies are supposed to do? Its supposed to entertain us.

brains off, balls out

[InnerConflict · 6/10 · 24 February 2022]

Something you dont see today anymore, too offensive for the snowflakes, exactly whats needed on a boring day, kickass, brains off, corny, edgy, free do whatever you want filmmaking. 6 of 10 because its... not really a good movie in technical terms, but it sure is one trip of badassery you shouldnt miss out on, get weed, get beer, delete twitter, and just lock n load.

What a waste...

[headfulofghosts126 · 2/10 · 18 February 2010]

Let me clarify something right off the bat... I am not a fanboy who rated this thing a 10 and down votes every negative review here. But I'm also not a hater. I enjoyed parts of the original movie when it came out. Sure it gets a little sillier with each subsequent viewing and there's nothing terribly original about it but it had an infectious style and a solid cast.

To be blunt, I can't even believe this sequel is for real. And I'm shocked how many fans of the first film say they enjoy it. For me this was a complete misfire every step of the way. The plot is ludicrous. Not because it's too complicated but because it just defies logic. It is not a compelling story on any level. It's an excuse to get the boys back in their pea coats and shooting guns in slow motion. There isn't a single plot point that's credible or followed through on. The movie keeps changing what it's really about. It doesn't feel like layers in a mystery are being pulled back. It feels like Duffy had no idea what this was really about and just kept letting the script wander. Characters are introduced halfway through with no real purpose or development.

The acting just flat out sucks. And I like a lot of these actors. Aside from Billy Connolly and Peter Fonda no one understands how to be subtle. They all crank it to eleven and turn themselves into cartoons, not characters. I thought the first one did a much better job of balancing the humor, action, and drama. Duffy appears clueless on how to accomplish that this time out. The bad guys aren't remotely threatening and even the returning detectives are made to look like buffoons at every turn.

The action scenes in the first film contain a lot of creative ideas that aren't shot as well as they could have been. They're not terrible, but not mind blowing. This one is just embarrassing. Every action beat consists of slow motion, techno music, and the brothers standing in plain view and not getting hit once (until the end when the script requires them to).

It also just feels smaller and cheaper than the original. The settings in the first one seemed real and dirty. We got a sense of the blue collar life in Boston. This one feels like it was shot on sitcom sets. And with hardly any extras it feels like our main characters and villains are the only people in the city.

I know you're all going to bury this review because you don't agree but there wasn't a single thing I found redeeming about this movie. Bad script, bad acting, bad directing, bad music, bad editing... it's just bad.

Boston Screening

[dbones310 · 9/10 · 20 October 2009]

Last night I went into Boston for the first ever screening of the Boondock Saints II, and it was simply AMAZING! The long awaited, highly anticipated sequel to the cult classic did not disappoint, and we were lucky enough to be able to view it along with Troy Duffy, Bob Marley, Billy Connolly, Sean Patrick Flanery, and Norman Reedus. Fans of the first movie will definitely enjoy seeing this film and is a MUST SEE for any Boondock fanatic. Kudos to the cast and crew for making a film that stayed true to the original, yet realistically modernized it to reflect the years that have passed since the original release. Sexy, smart, funny, and action-packed, All Saints Day was everything you want to see in a great flick, plus more. A great experience! Highly recommended, so GO SEE IT when it's released! You will not be sorry that you did. This girl certainly wasn't ;)

Daddy's Working

[ferguson-6 · 6/10 · 19 November 2009]

Greetings again from the darkness. I really do get it. 10 years of ideas, dreams and pent up frustrations. Writer/director Troy Duff has wanted (and deserved) a sequel to his original Boondock Saints, and after all the rumors and near misses, it's finally here ... with guns and f-bombs blazing.

Sean Patrick Flannery (Conner), Norman Reedus (Murphy) and Billy Connolly (Poppa) are back as the vengeance-seeking McManus clan. The film begins with the boys living a quiet life of solitude on a sheep farm in Ireland. Things change quickly when a priest is murdered in Boston and the killer makes it look like our boys are responsible.

Presented as now dead, Willem Dafoe's Agent Paul Smecker (the best part of the first film), has hand-chosen his successor. Unfortunately, it is Julie Benz (the worst part of the stunningly original cable series "Dexter"). We are supposed to believe that Eunice Bloom (Benz) has the same crime scene 6th sense of Smecker, while sporting the absolute worst southern accent in movie history. She teams with the 3 remaining Boston detectives from the original to "assist" the boys on their mission. Oh and on the boat ride over, the McMurphy brothers pick up some comedy relief as a sidekick in the terrific Clifton Collins (Romeo).

There are many humorous moments, tons of gratuitous violence (noted by Murphy in an elevator), some horrific editing, a nod to Tarantino and Rodriguez, and a full explanation of Poppa's history. That history is tied to an interesting character played by Peter Fonda, which makes for an entertaining sequence shot in a rundown greenhouse.

Mr. Duffy has no shortage of ideas and, for the most part, provides an entertaining film ... almost in tribute to the original. Not sure how many new fans he will make, but he has certainly satisfied the original cult following. Oh, and make no mistake, the last few minutes of the film play like the opening of the next round.

Major disappointment : (

[priest_of_zeus · 2/10 · 18 November 2009]

Being a fan of the Saints for years I went into this movie with high expectations and a good amount of personal excitement. Unfortunately, this movie fell way below the standards set by the first installment, for these reasons:

.paper thin plot = very generic, the kind of thing you come up with in five minutes of stereotypical mob brainstorming.

.Dumbed down = Where the first movie succeeded in being witty and fun the second can only survive off of gay jokes and three stooges antics.

.Copying = It seemed like every single well known moment in the first movie was copy and pasted into this movie with the exact same outcome every time. Like they couldn't of anything else to do with them but what they already did.

.Dependent = This movie depended Way too heavily on the first being the underground classic it was. It just tries so hard to be the same bad-ass movie that all the shootout scenes are in slomo and last 25-30 min apiece.

Troy Duffy had his chance to make a movie again and in my opinion all he did was plagiarize himself. Though at times it was funny, the few and far between moments were not enough to save what should have been a continuation of a vigilante cult classic that survived despite the odds. What we get instead is Troy Duffy's homage to himself and a movie that never should have been made.

Don't watch this

[myimdbisgood · 14 February 2010]

I had high expectations, as I very much enjoyed the first movie. I was also very pleased to see the return of the father and his sons as the original actors...so far so good! Were it not that this new movie is almost an exact copy of the 1st one! The characters are not worked out in more depth, the mobsters are simply replaced with new ones, there's a new annoying sidekick in Rocco's place and the gunfights seem to be amped a bit. The very cool agent Willem Dafoe has been replaced by a female FBI agent who acts a bit too tough for her character and has a southern accent that is again, very annoying and distracts from the actual story.

At 2 hours playtime in total I'd recommend that you'll find something else to with your time...ANYTHING else...clean up your house, sleep go out or take a walk.

Decently good. No, not great, but good.

[awinkelmann · 6/10 · 27 November 2009]

As a big fan of the first one, I had high hopes for the second. It was good, but not amazing. It's a sequel, so it should be judged based on that fact. If it were a standalone movie, it would fail.

First, the good. Impressively, though the sequel took years to come about, Duffy managed to maintain the entire cast of the first movie that went miles for maintaining the plot. The story of the sequel was decently believable and the actions scenes were fantastic and arguably, better than in the first. Overall, the movie was enjoyable and a successful sequel.

Now, the bad. If you liked the first one, you'll most likely like the second one. Alone this isn't a bad thing, but the reason is still a problem. The reason? It's as if they took a survey of what people liked about the first one and increased it by 200% in the second installment. For example, if you liked the church-themed music, zany sidekick, Rocko, and slapstick, over-acting in the supporting cast, well, you'll get plenty of each. If you like those aspects and wanted more, a lot more, of each, you'll be pleased. For me, too much of a good thing is not a great thing.

The church-themed music of the first flick was great and overall not distracting from the original. This is not the case in the second. One can look forward to church bells, club-thumping base and even one song ending now, surely trademarked, "Spirtu Sancti." Again, subjective as any review may be, the side-kick Rocko was completely fitting in the original, but his replacement in the sequel was distracting at best and idiotic and stereotypical at worst (most of the time).

Lastly, as I mentioned earlier, the supporting cast was maintained: both a pro and a con. The downside here is that they seemed to have spent the subsequent years following the original movie, honing their skills of over-acting. I'll not argue that that isn't what made the characters in the first movie colorful and endearing, but again, at 200% of the first movie, it's annoying, distracting and leads to several eyebrow furling moments and incredulous "You gotta be kidding me" looks from the viewers.

Towards the end of the movie, there is a masculinity-affirming cut scene whose tie to the movie is tenuous. This scene, like many other aspects of the movie, may be entertaining by themselves, but distracting from the movie as a whole.

Overall, the movie was good, no not great, but good. I'd watch it again, and will. But I sincerely hope the blu-ray release does something to address the blood packet vests used for special effects that make several outlined appearances through t-shirts during the gun fights.

Amen Again

[Samiam3 · 7/10 · 10 March 2010]

When I saw the Boondock Saints, I made an immediate comparison to the Coen Bros. Thinking about it again, this material bears stronger resemblance to Quentin Tarantino. The saints are too, (for lack of a better word) ...playfull. Troy Duffy's direction literally draws attention to itself, through manipulation of photography editing and narration, as was the case in the first. It works just as well here too, as does the film as a whole, despite the fact the half the plot is identical to its predecessor.

It has been eight years since the Saints put on their show in Boston, they have since disappeared, back to Ireland, but are drawn into action again when they hear news that a Boston Priest was killed in his own church by someone trying to match the work of the saints (two bullet holes in the head + coins in the victims eyes). The Bros. suit up and hop across the pond for action. They team up with a couple of new friends as well as some old friends.

All Saints Day doesn't offer much in the way of new story material, but it takes a shot at trying to explain the father's story, which is probably a good idea, seeing as his presence in the was random and abrupt. Surprisingly All Saints Day is significantly funnier than it's predecessor. The trick is to notice several running gags, the best of which is the way in which one of the brothers sees rope a necessity for a surprise attack.

It looks like Troy Duffy is aiming for a trilogy considering the ending to this is a major cliffhanger. The question is will he get enough financial support and will it take him another ten years to get it.

Hard to say how big the fan base is for the saints, but if there is still one even after ten year, this film will definitely deliver.

Not THAT bad

[patrickjcareyiii · 7/10 · 6 January 2011]

I expected much worse having read the reviews. It wasn't awesome but it wasn't terrible either.

I could have done without the mediocre filmography... what's with the old-timey 8mm special effects with some of the flashbacks? There are places in the film where it's totally obvious that this was intended for limited release or direct to disc. Closeups on characters faces where the original would have had a wide angle view instead are a dead giveaway that when this movie was filmed, no one knew whether or not it would make it to the big screen.

I also could have done without half the soundtrack. Some of the music was inserted where it was not necessary or useful to forwarding the story... in some places it took away from the storytelling.

It's also loaded with curses without clever usage... they don't even fit into the story, they were just superfluous and stupid. "We got prison ******... in the ***".

Not necessary and it removes quality from the final product.

All that said I did like this movie more than I thought I would. There are a few aspects that redeem it, in particular those places without background music, and without campy dialogue... where they just focused on the conversation and the story.

This could have been better. Overall, its flaws remind of the old adage 'too many cooks stirring the pot'. But I did like the movie despite it's problems.

Would I buy a copy and watch it over and over again, like I did the original? No. But I watched it on Netflix and it didn't disappoint me with regard to entertainment value. It's worth watching once or twice.

If you enjoyed the first movie DON'T see this one!

[quinton007 · 1/10 · 3 December 2009]

How to go wrong with a sequel:

1. Use the same storyline and premise and fail to build any new conflict.

2. Use all the same cinema techniques and add louder music.

3. Get the same cast but tell them to overact and look ridiculous.

4. Only spend five minutes writing your screenplay.

This movie is a joke. Troy Duffy obviously felt that he needed to cash in on his cult success with the first movie. There was no character development. The plot was only mildly different and the characters acted as if their IQ's had dropped forty points between movies. Horrible writing!! You shouldn't put a decade between ideas!

The original Boondock Saints had a gritty feel to it. The moments of comedy were never campy or corny, but actually a bit morbid. In this waste-of-money-called-a-sequel, there is no dark edge. The characters are lacking depth and conviction; it feels as if the cast is simply going through the motions. The story is not cohesive and the plot just plain fails to hold up. The only things that keep interest, are the flashback back-story sequences about the father.

Do not waste your time or money!

Rough-cut diamond

[earth-2-scott · 8/10 · 9 November 2009]

For aficionados of the first movie, this is a sure-fire winner. It has everything a Boondock Saints fan could ask for. High body-count, slow-mo fight sequences and the über-cool, very likable MacManus brothers. What's not to like? Well, the acting for one -- specifically the supporting actors. For some reason, the supporting actors' performances were almost all amateurish and distracted from what could have been a truly great movie. Even though it has serious flaws and the critics are likely to be merciless, I am here to tell you DON'T BELIEVE THEM! Go see it for yourself. This movie rocks. And speaking of rock, the sound track kicks ass too.

The Boondock Saints II:All Saints Day

[Scarecrow-88 · 6/10 · 22 September 2010]

Let's do some gratuitous violence.

Soldiers of the Son of God, "Jesus freaks", the underground celebrated Saints, Conner and Murphy MacManus(Sean Patrick Flanery & Norman Reedus), return to their old hunting grounds of Boston to take down the ones responsible for the murder of a priest. They are framed for this murder as the hit man behind the crime attempted to set it up as an orchestrated crime scene the Saints would commit. Conner and Murphy attain a new partner in Latino dish washer Romeo(Clifton Collins Jr), who so desperately wants to fit in and become part of their team. What results is a massacre as the trio obliterate an entire Italian mob, led by a mysterious "Old Man" called "The Roman" and the one he has in charge, Concezio Yakavetta(Judd Nelson). Julie Benz(toying with a terrible Texan accent)is Special Agent Eunice, head over the priest's case, and, subsequently, secretly an ally of the Brothers MacManus, helping them along the way which lands her eventually in hot water. Billy Connolly returns as Poppa MacManus, and we are privy to flashbacks when he was a young man, seeing that his father was killed, understanding how he would become such a notorious killer and learning of a brother who betrayed him. Detectives Greenly, Duffy, and Dolly(Bob Marley, Brian Mahoney, & David Ferry )are worried that Eunice will uncover the fact that they are aligned with the MacManus brothers. As expected, THE BOONDOCK SAINTS II has plenty of shootouts and slow motion body damage as mob goons fall in alarming numbers. We are supposed to accept the idea that three people(well Benz gets in on the fun, too, even donning a cowgirl outfit at one point)can annihilate an entire mob family. That's the fun of it, really, seeing so few kill so many. THE BOONDOCK SAINTS II is more comedy than anything else, satirizing the mob movie, poking fun at the stereotypes. Willem Dafoe and Peter Fonda appear in small roles.

It's like a cartoon version of something that was once good.

[JJBrent · 1/10 · 11 February 2010]

WOW! I absolutely loved the original. This one is so bad, I almost hate the first movie. Seriously awful. It's full of terrible acting performances from actors who put in a good turn first time around. I hate when a character knows what's quirky about themselves. I can't believe in them when everyone appears as though they know they're in a movie and are IN on the joke. They're not supposed to be, only the audience is. The movie is filled with forced references to what came off in the first film as spontaneous but simply now fall flat. Reedus and Flanery are slumming here. Also slumming is Julie Benz who is basically playing Kyra Sedgwick as The Closer (2005 TV Series). I understand the draw to be in this film, knowing the cult following of the original but this was a big mistake for everyone involved from top to bottom. I don't want to blame the actors totally, there's hardly a good performance to be seen, but with what they had to work with, good lord.

I wanted to love this so bad. I even lowered my expectations in order to have a buffer to allow me to think it was better than expected. Impossible. Boondock Saints one was lightning in a bottle. Perhaps even a fluke. Sure, I saw "Overnight" and bore witness to the train wreck that was Troy Duffy but I always felt saddened by the fact that the original movie showed that he actually had talent and that his demise meant never seeing what he could do if given all of the right ingredients to make more films. If they are anything like this one, I would say that BS1 was indeed a fluke not to be repeated. Furthermore, it makes me wonder if he actually directed BS1.

Unless your character's are Ferris Bueller, they shouldn't be so self aware. It takes them and your audience out of the movie. We need to discover the path WITH our heroes, not have it all drawn out like Wyle E. Coyote's moronic designs. Repeatedly in this film a character will say something and, as the audience member you think, "I knew he was going to say that. And I wish he hadn't"

By the way, I sure wish Judd Nelson would could land some major films. Given the right script and director, we could get some great performances out of him. Right when he seemed to be channeling Pacino, he was derailed with asinine dialog injected to sound witty , profound or even just profane but landed like a thud. I hearken back to Saints 1 where Carlo Rota as Yakavetta is yelling at someone on the phone as he gets his sandwich. That exchange is confusing and out of contexts but feels so real. It was either his brilliant acting or a combination of that, script and direction. That movie was filled with that brilliance. BSII had NONE of it. I'd say the best part of this movie is the tease we get of Rocco and his voice over at the opening of the film. The rest goes downhill so fast it's almost a free fall.

I will forever try to forget that this movie exists so I can still enjoy the raw energy and relentless pace of the first film. This movie is the second Boondock Saints film, yes, that's right, it's NUMBER TWO!

Ah a film for the lovers

[IceSkateUpHill · 8/10 · 30 October 2009]

If you liked or loved the first one this one will definitely entertain. Even if you haven't seen the first one this one will still be entertaining, but you might not understand all of the in-jokes, which there are several of but they do not take anything away from the film. This one is a whole lot like the first one in that the two greatest Irish catholic killers of bad men are doing what they do best: killing bad men. We find the brothers living a quiet bearded life in Ireland, the beards are little silly but it gives you the idea that many years of no killing has taken a toll on the brothers and their looks. After getting a quick view of their simple lives they are quickly brought right back into action after news that a priest has been killed back in hometown Boston. This killing in particular upsets the brother because it is done in the same exact fashion that the brothers execute their big targets. Whilst on the way back home they pick up a new partner, a humorous Hispanic replacement for Rocco from the first one, who is their new contact into Bostons criminal underworld. Willem Dafoe is also replaced by a female FBI agent who does her job just like Willems character does because she is his protégé and she is very good at her job. Returning characters include the three cops that worked with Dafoes character in the first one and they are all hysterical and make a nice little side characters, their bar owning friend F#$% A$$ is also back and gives them shelter and drinks. While on their quest for revenge their are many laughs and many shoot outs, the violence is fun and stylish. Recommended for lovers of the first and anyone in the mood for a fun stylish action movie.

It's like Kevin Smith wrote and directed the sequel

[azn · 6/10 · 3 March 2010]

If you're expecting an epic in the vein of Boondock Saints, prepare to be disappointed. All Saints Day is a parody of the original movie that just so happens to be written and directed by the same guy. In order to enjoy this film, the viewer must accept it as a satirical take on the cult status of the original. The overall tone is comedic, as opposed to the dramatic dark humor of the first.

Now, with the right mindset going in, you WILL enjoy this movie! It was DEFINITELY made only for the fans. The movie opens with Connor and Murphy tending a flock of sheep, which only fans will infer from their trademark prayer. It's this sort of in-joke that sets the tone; the uninitiated won't follow all the callbacks to the original.

The plot's not all that important. Fans of the Saints would watch Connor and Murphy Go to White Castle. Revenge, references and reprised or re-written roles rule.

Worst sequel I've ever seen!

[tom-681-36092 · 1/10 · 9 March 2010]

Way to destroy the original movie! The cinematography was the only OK part. The dialogs were very artificial and low, low, low. An average high school kid would have written better lines. The acting was terrible! Over the top and not convincing at all.

It almost looks like Weird Al Yankovic wrote, directed and acted in it! Wait, let me take it back... If he had done it it would have been better.

I loved the original movie and the sequel makes me ashamed of it.

The first movie was an A-class movie. This one is a Z-class.

Don't waste your money!