Add a Review

  • This is a pretty darn bland movie with some poor editing and super cheesy and poorly executed action sequences. Mainly because of the camera execution, it was just lame from start to finish. The acting is pretty bad and seems like regular civilians with shaved heads, some muscle and a beard participated. Or guys that just look slick or a bit geeky played these roles. I like watching movies where it's survival of the fittest, but this movie was boring. I have seen much better from amateur youtube videos and much entertaining as well. Randy Orton for most the time, looked like he didn't know what he was doing. The movie is about an hour and thirty minutes and they try to milk every second of it. Because apparently movies have to be at least 1 hour and 30 minutes or close to it. So there is a bunch of shots of rich people throwing around money, cheering and making bets. Sure this can play a part in the story, but not when it's constantly shown over and over again. This is a action movie, but just about all of the action in this movie is downright stupid and doesn't make any sense. The story seems like something someone can come up with in like an hour by just sitting and writing. Even the interactions between characters was so bad, cliché and boring. Just pass on this one, it's a waste of time. I give this movie a 3 because they seem to have tried really hard to make a cool, stylish quasi video game style movie.

  • There are so many things wrong with the execution, it often defies logic and ventures into cheesiness, especially towards latter half. The action doesn't work and even looks more unreal than actual pro wrestling stunts. Unfortunately, this leaves the movie with silly slow-mo and random explosions, which only work as mild diversion at best.

    Will (Randy Orton) is a former bounty hunter who wants to turn his life around, when suddenly people start popping up in his life trying to kill him. This silly way of killing a target is set by the antagonist Raul as he creates gambling den to bet on Will's life, but the mercenaries appears in such silly determined manner almost like a video game where they must battle enemy one at a time.

    The premise is highly illogical, not to mention motivation for characters feel unconvincing. Furthermore, they can suddenly appear or react in very bizarre way for the sake of plot, that they movie just doesn't try to explain anymore in the second half. It just wants the audience to sit back and enjoy the rapid fire and liberal use of explosion.

    Randy Orton is pretty good, he does look the simple action hero part. In the beginning, his character is given decent backstory, which the movie drops once the shooting begins. Ironically, for action movie the choreography looks very timid. Expect missed punch and poor editing for fight scenes, and it's even worse when the movie tries to sell the antagonist, who is a foot shorter than the main character and lacks any charisma.

    This is a movie of a man wearing plot armor, rushing through bullets and explosions in slow-mo. It's messy in terms of logic and plot, so those wanting a more cerebral action would be disappointed.
  • redcodex45310 November 2015
    The plot does not make sense at all. It almost gave me a headache to try and make sense of the plot while stifling through countless flaws in the movie. The nonsense eventually overpowers the film. The only reason I decide to sit through is for some good ass kicking by Mr.Orton but even that is a disaster. Unnecessary explosions and overhead shots from the drones makes the most of the movie. Felt more like a promotion for drones. If they had stuck to the original plot and made a sequel on just that I believe it would have been much more tolerable. Lionsgate-WWE being such a big production fails to deliver and has been since the past few projects.
  • This movie makes 'The Condemned' with Steve Austin look like an Academy Award winning movie.

    I do not know where to begin. Eric Roberts seems to be the only actor that can sort of... act in this movie. This says a fair bit as the guy is not the best actor going around. The script seems to be written by an 8 year old. The delivery of the lines is some of the worst I have ever seen. Randy Orton's fight scenes are clearly choreographed (you can tell the punches do not connect). His WWE matches are more realistic.

    Do yourself a favor and stay away from this movie.
  • "The Condemned 2" stars Randy Orton as a likable underachiever who disappoints his family and associates. A similar criticism could be leveled at the film.

    The story concept is actually a vast improvement over "The Condemned" (2007), which was basically a retelling of Richard Connell's "The Most Dangerous Game" with multiple "contestants" pitted against one another and video surveillance. This version adds elements of films like "The 10th Victim" and "The Tournament;" a revenge plot similar to the "12 Rounds" movies; the blood sport promotion to jaded reality television viewers used in the "Death Race" films and the idea of jaded gamblers wagering on the survival of the contestants.

    The script has numerous elements that could have been developed much more effectively. The gambling angle was highlighted, but made little sense. Bookies make money regardless of the outcome of sporting events. It makes no sense at all that Raul would be concerned that the events would somehow break the house.

    Another intriguing angle is how the villain managed to intimidate and coerce several characters who seem particularly insusceptible to coercion. This is never explored or explained and detracts from the film's tenuous credibility. One character, presumably acting because of threats to his family, chooses death over surrender when death holds no promise of saving his family, but surrender might.

    The strong suit in WWE films is usually the martial arts scenes. The gunfights, car chases and pyrotechnics are typically less imaginative. TC2 is no exception, but the martial arts scenes are not impressive and there is too much reliance on gunplay. The film might be more effective if it played to the strengths of its actors.

    A few incidents defy all logic and reason. A character fires a short burst with an assault rifle at another character standing a few feet away, but misses. A character suffers a "through- and-through" bullet wound from a .50 caliber BMG sniper rifle that not only fails to rip off his arm, but doesn't slow him down much. Two characters survive a fragmentation grenade that detonates a few feet away from them. Not only are they uninjured, but they can hear each other speak in normal voices afterward.

    The story lacks a romantic angle. The only subplot concerns father-son love, which is a little ham-fisted. A similar subplot was handled much more effectively and efficiently in "Inception." Several attractive girls show interest in Tanner, but he never responds with much interest.

    Technical aspects are generally passable. Lighting is a bit weak and the typical overdependence on jiggly-cam shots is evident, although not as obvious as in some other films. It takes time to set up a tripod, level out the bubbles, brace it with sandbags and choreograph the action with the camera movement. One can appreciate the simplicity and economy of Steadicam rigs. But films that rely extensively on jiggly-cam shots often feel like the director has asked the cameraman to cover the action as best as he can. The results often seem haphazard rather than planned and crafted. One of the scenes that does seem well crafted is a minor scene involving Tanner changing a tire. Another involves a lot of dirt.

    Overall, the film is passable as a no-brainer action film. There are a few good shots, including one where Tanner camouflages himself, a slow-motion close-up of the effect of shock waves and the destruction of a flying object. The action is watchable, but uninspired. The characters do as well as can be expected with what they're given.

    The film has a sort of half-baked theme about Tanner needing to follow though and the nature of accepting responsibility. But Tanner never has a plausible option not to continue to the conclusion. He is pushed along by outside forces. The characters who actually make moral choices are his father and two members of his team. In an early scene, a judge imposes an ultimatum which motivates Tanner, but that ultimatum is later abrogated by a character who doesn't have the authority to do so and offers a reward which would ordinarily be unavailable to somebody convicted of manslaughter.

    The major problems lie in the script and direction. The script seems like it's about two re- writes short of complete and the direction seems slipshod, haphazard and unplanned. However, it squeezes in a lot of action, usually at a lively pace and the scenery looks nice.

    If one can crank up ones willful suspension of disbelief to a moderately high level and sit back and enjoy the show, it's not a bad way to fritter away ninety minutes.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The lines given to the actors and actresses is so lame and pointless. They have actors that say they are professionals in there own field, but having sniper cannot shoot worth crap just is so lame. Little alone they know they are still being followed but hide in a RV and have a beer? Then they leave the viewer dumbfound when in the movie are about to phone the police but never do? Most actors need to take acting lessons and have a better writer before calling "Action" and rolling on this film.

    How did this ever get past the final read and accepted as a script for a full movie is beyond me. It is just total garbage, not even a made for TV movie. If you like total lack of continuity and a poor plot with total lack of acting here is the brain dead movie to watch. Do not waste your time, even "The Condemned I" from 2007 was a marginally better! Unfortunately IMDb does not have a "0" for rating movies, too bad!
  • Very disappointing! I like Randy and think that he can be fine in movies, however, this whole movie was bad. Not very professional! Script, directing, acting, all bad. One scene, a guy is standing inside a gas station holding a shotgun. In the next frame, the shotgun is gone & he is diving behind a counter with a handgun.

    The best actor was Eric Roberts, at least his voice had some inflection in it! However, someone needs to tell Eric that a 1911 is a single action not a double action!

    Stopped watching about half way through and can't believe that I lasted that long!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    i swear i seriously need to punish myself for this sin. Sin of watching such a pathetic movie. i don't know what shall i say you guys. i downloaded this movie and kept it for Saturday night. thought it would really be good ... but it just backfired and my whole Saturday evening was ruined. and on top of all , i ended up fighting wid my girl , just cos i was frustrated that why did i watch this movie...

    if you really watch this movie now , even after such a caution , then i m sure that you will end up killing someone near you or will kill yourself...

    best of luck guys.
  • "Why is our old crew trying to kill me." Will Tanner (Orton) is a bounty hunter that is shut down by a judge. Given a warning he decides to go straight rather than winding up in jail. When he becomes a target in the new Condemned tournament he is forced to defend himself against his friends. There really isn't a whole lot to say about this movie. Much like the first one it is a reality show based idea where people place bets on who kills him first. Randy Orton is a pretty good choice for this role and the movie is pretty much exactly what you would expect. A decent B-movie that is entertaining to watch but nothing amazing or award worthy. But then again what wrestler movie is. Overall, entertaining but not really anything to watch more than once. I give this a C+.
  • djdeathx4 January 2016
    Just don't waste your time with this movie. Bad acting, horrible plot, unbelievable bullets go through wood but don't hit the main actor but you can clearly make out the holes facing the actor. Just wow. They try to make it "modern" with shitty graphics and horrible sound effects but it just makes it worse. I stopped watching it half-way, I got up and left. Just garbage. In fact, the alien spider movie was better and that had like a $10K budget or something like that. Didn't this turd of a director have a better plot to waste their money on? I guess it's all part of the shitty experience. All you gotta look is the main actor and realize he can't act if his life depended on it. There's plenty of times where you can see the actors faking their horrible acting. I wish there was a -1 rating.
  • The Condemned with Steve Austin was different, unique and had a flare to it. Sure the acting wasn't superb but it was decent. The Condemned 2 was horrible from start to finish. This film was poorly adapted, screenplay had a feel of being written by a high school teen, plot was weak and characters were dreadful. Randy Orton is horrid as an actor and the fight sequences were so distasteful they landed like a middle school fight. I give this poorly done film a 3 out of 10.
  • You, not so much. Dang, that just got me about $1M dollars. In bitcoin. I should've bet earlier on the actors living earlier at the end of the movie. Eric Roberts is one of those guys that you can't trust, ever. Oh, wait, was that a spoiler? Don't believe it.

    Stupid movie. Bad acting. Enjoyable waste of time.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    THE CONDEMNED 2 is a late-stage straight-to-video sequel for a 2007 action flick starring Steve Austin. It has no connection with that movie expect to feature another tournament in which characters fight to the death for audience entertainment, although the setting isn't an island here but instead the action merely plays out in the desert countryside. Another former wrestler takes the lead role, but Randy Orton is completely terrible and has all of the charisma and acting ability of a garden ornament.

    The film's plot is clichéd and predictable, although it's fun to see what Wes Studi has been up to as of late. There are plentiful action scenes but none of them are particularly great, merely middling and acceptable at best. The dialogue is very poor and the film seems to go on forever despite a relatively short running time. At least Eric Roberts doesn't have to play the villain this time around.
  • Many of the other reviews here have done a great job of summing up how monumentally awful this movie is. To say it fails on every single level is old news. Nothing at all like Condemned which was a great movie. Condemned 2 virtually typifies many of the least entertaining things a movie can deliver. It's so far beyond bad. No one in the movie does anything a normal person would do. Not one. Randy "The Viper" just walks about shuffling his feet mumbling his lines putting inflection on all the wrong words. It's almost surreal. Then it's frown, fake smile, frown for no reason.

    Many drinking games can be developed on various bad traits in this movie - How many times a clear shot misses, how many times characters get 30 rounds out of a 10 round clip, how many times bets are made by the nameless gamblers yet NOTHING has happened to preface the bets - There is literally nothing to be betting on! Another great one would be to do a shot of beer (not the hard stuff - you'll be too wasted) each time Randy unnaturally pauses before progressing through a scene or delivering a line. These are not normal pauses, folks. This is Randy (who doesn't seem too bright and may have CTE from all that wrestling) trying his earnest to remember what his cut-rate acting coach tried to teach him in his week of classes. . . . "Now Randy. Remember how you learned on Monday that you have to stare at the phone for 3 seconds after a call has ended, right? OK, so today we're going to go over 'Unnatural Pausing for Dramatic Effect'? Now these pauses will happen completely unannounced and have no relation to reality -- BUT it will show your dramatic range and truly make the scene!"
  • Scarecrow-8830 January 2017
    Warning: Spoilers
    WWE Superstar, Randy Orton, stars as failed leader of Bail Enforcement Agency, built by his pop, Eric Roberts, accidentally killing mark, Wes Studi, which leads to him pleading down to involuntary manslaughter so he can get out of jail. Studi's partner in crime (Steven Michael Quezada) sets up a human hunting "competition" pitting Orton against those members of his former bounty hunting team as wealthy gamblers bet on who will survive. One ludicrous moment has Orton agreeing to go for a ride with a friend after just nearly being killed by another pal in a diner, oblivious to the idea that he could be in danger, even as Roberts warns him against it! Big star is the New Mexico locations, and this is essentially a western in all but modern vehicles and dress. Orton has the look of an action star, translating his laconic, gruff-voiced, steely-eyed presence within the wrestling ring to the desert vistas and dusty plains where the sun is unforgiving and green of the earth scarce. Roel Reiné photographs his location grand, capitalizing on the vastness of space from birdseye view long distance sky shots, slow motion and quick edit action sequences sometimes in concert to Peckinpah his film up right. Included is a sniper killing a female deputy while targeting Orton, soon coming after him in a dune buggy with machine gun in hand, and a bomb specialist with traps set up, eventually set off a chain reaction, resulting in a fight over a grenade missing its pin. Orton isn't without his bumps, bruises, scrapes, wounds, and gunshots, so the film doesn't present him always as superhuman. Quezada has a drone in the air as his eye in the sky, with a violence-lusting clientele dropping heavy cash to see bloodshed. A few pals who decided to join forces with Orton instead of kill him plot a course directly for Quezada. Quezada makes himself a contestant, with the sniper still on the hunt, and Roberts soon volunteering to help his son kick some ass. Roberts is a welcome presence, although he doesn't get to kill a whole lot of folks. Bill Stinchcomb is Orton's first true ally with Alex Knight soon getting his head on straight to use his bomb skills as a help not hindrance. Lots of explosions and gunfire, mayhem and Kaboom! result. About what you'd expect: doesn't reinvent the wheel. The hand to hand combat is unimpressive and Orton needed a more noteworthy villain to conquer.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I have seen "The Condemned" a few times since its release because although it has its obvious flaws, it has a lot of entertainment to it; on IMDb I rated the first film 7/10, which is pretty good in my books. I was looking at the related films section on IMDb and saw that there was a "The Condemned 2" movie and I had no idea! So I thought to myself, "awesome! This should be reasonable". I just got around to watching it last night, and well, my goodness, it was dreadful...

    Character development: What characters? These people are practically nameless. We know almost nothing about them.

    Acting: I have seen juniors on their first produced film act so much better. Most of the so called "characters" acting were so shallow and barely believable. It was painful to watch.

    Screenplay: *groans* I think whoever wrote this script jotted the whole rough copy down on paper in a maximum of 2 hours and stuck with it..

    The predictability in this film too! Everything that happened, you could see coming a mile away. There seemed to be excessive explosions.. ALL THE TIME.. Excessive amounts of gun fights.. ALL THE TIME.. and not to mention, slooooooow moooootion.. ALL THE TIME!...

    If the screenplay of an action flick is done right, you should have a balance between pure action, drama and character development. You need a build up and intrigue toward characters, so that the suspense of the action grabs you, sits you down and makes you watch with anticipation. This film failed as an enjoyable action flick, in every possible way.

    Also, this film is barely a sequel to the first and it scars "The Condemned" name by claiming to be a part of it. The first film was mentioned once for a brief moment in the entirety of the film.

    I didn't have high hopes because of the rating, but Jesus. What were WWE Studios/Lionsgate thinking?

    This film is only rated 4.2/10 and it is STILL overrated; that is depressing. Absolutely horrendous and extremely disappointing. 1/20
  • mamunswiftex3 December 2015
    Warning: Spoilers
    Plot Funny .acting Funny..Story Funny..Total Movie is a Bag of junk. The main villain of this movie looks like a street cheap jocker to me. And randy orton is a crap. Don't think that Austin is good Rock is good even Jhon cena was not bad that much so all the wrestler is good actor from WWE. The only good thing is production house LIONGATE . And I hope that such production house will not allow this kind of rubbish thing further . Because this kinda movie destroy the original flavor that we get from the Condemned .And still if you want to make such kind of thing please give it different name

    NOTE: BTW It was impossible to finish the Movie after 32 mins for me.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Im giving this a 3/10 due to im a WWE fan and i felt sorry Randy Orton got dragged into making this film. The first film was a enjoyable film with great cast and a decent concept this one is the perfect evidence of wwe studios thinking that because the first one worked then we should do another one.......urrmm no!! This time round former bounty hunter (Randy Orton) is on the run from his own team as the condemned tournament gets revamped (his own team get paid off to kill him) and the so called fight to the death begins. The action is lackluster the fight scenes look like they are from the iconic 80s TV programme Knight Rider and not evan veteran Eric Roberts could help this film. If you are truly board and have nothing to watch no games to play and literally have nothing to do then you could kill 90mins and watch this film.
  • mzmshahriar17 February 2016
    Watching this movie I gained the enlightenment of life and its meaning. As I watched it, I understood the sheer magnitude of diversity in terms of cognition. It may appear by viewing the movie itself that is immensely degenerative and incoherent, and at times you might think, "Why doesn't he rko someone?" And the way this movie exhibits one can not help but wonder, if the director of this movie is consuming oxygen and getting the opulence needed to manifest his cancerous and premature thoughts by this movie, there must be some meaning to life. Life is beautiful, cherishing it as the director did by making this movie, within his microscopic capacity, is something everyone can come across. Rejoice life!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This film is not a sequel to the far better first feature. We do find out midpoint it was inspired by that film. This review may contain plot spoilers by some definition of that term, but it is a formula film, so the Hollywood outcome is predetermined.

    The feature opens up with "Tanner Bail Enforcer" bounty hunters going after a big score. We are shown the individuals as grindhouse/video game ID screen which gives us all their information except Charisma points. Will Tanner (Randy Orton) accidentally kills their bounty in self defense, but still takes a plea deal of involuntary manslaughter and gets a suspended sentence. Even his dad (Eric Roberts) doesn't understand it as son finds himself working for his dad's wreaking service.

    The film finally takes us to the meat of the plot as Will Tanner is hunted by his former team mates. It seems Raul (Steven Michael Quezada) who has taken over for the man Tanner killed has threatened the families etc. forcing his friends to turn on Tanner. The movie becomes a poor man's "Running Man" with a badly choreographed mine field sequence designed to be a highlight.

    The film is on the low side of action films. If watching Eric Roberts get punched in the face for all the stinker films he has been over billed, this one has it. I just wish they had hit him more. Now having said that, Eric Roberts wasn't half bad in this film, or at least compared to the other monotone "actors." If you are expecting something as good as the original, this is more like "Meatballs 2."

    Guide: Occasional F-bomb and acting. No sex or nudity.
  • The WWE made a direct-to-video sequel of their ripoff film of the Japanese cult classic "Battle Royale" that's painfully dull. No Steve Austin this time and instead the wrestler star is Randy Orton (I'm not familiar with him as a wrestler, but I do remember his dad, "Cowboy" Bob Orton). The original film stuck much closer to "Battle Royale," with unwitting victims finding themselves trapped on an island, wearing explosive collars, and then being told they have to kill each other in a set amount of time or all of their collars will explode. That was all straight out of Kinji Fukasaku's "Battle Royale," though I suppose one could argue that Fukasaku's film (based on a Japanese novel) was really a more violent update of "The Most Dangerous Game." However, the original Condemned, although derivative, was still entertaining and had some decent action. This sequel felt super cheap, especially the low budget desert setting where the competitors find themselves once again killing each other off for the entertainment of others. Eric Roberts and Wes Studi do some slumming, but they can't make this film worth watching or even watchable. Dullsville.
  • Tinmancr2 October 2016
    No don't get me wrong this is not a good movie.. But its fairly amusing actually pretty funny.. Unlike the first it is not sick to the point nausea. It is loaded with well mostly 90s nobody's and WWE numb skulls. But hey its kinda fun still not family friendly but OK for grown ups who are not chemically unbalanced. Oh need more lines Hey don't forget its badly acted including Eric Roberts now without lifts ha ha hes short and old now. On the positive it has well done photography and sound for a b movie. Plot is quite bad but can be followed and seen much worse in big budget movies. If you like Orton watch it or bad action movies or just a mindless romp.