Smokin' Aces 2: Assassins' Ball (2010) Reviews

• Different director, different actors, different result ...

  imdb-212542010-01-10

  I really, really liked Smokin Aces, and i was excited to go watch this sequel, featuring my favorite UK actor Vinnie Jones, who always gives violent movies this little extra just be his appearance. As so often with sequels, this one just doesn't cut it - it is nowhere near as well-acted, intense and spectacular as the original. The story features some of the assassins from part 1, but they have been cramped into the plot in an awkward way this time - without giving away too much, it's rather unbelievable. Their methods seem dull after watching part 1, and the addition of the new assassins doesn't make up for that at all. Bad, b-movie style acting and extremely bad CGI (explosions!) take up the remaining 1.5 hours, until the foreseeable-from-minute-1 plot-twist kicks in. Loads of plot holes, bad dialogs and unexplained sudden character-developments makes me rate this 3/10 unfortunately. TLDR: Don't bother, grab it once its out on DVD

• Takes all the good out of the original and throws it away

  zzmasta2010-01-10

  I was sent an advance copy of this movie on DVD. I enjoyed the first Smokin Aces and I had no problem spending 90 minutes on this one. Firstly, there's tons of gratuitous violence and nudity. If that's not your thing, skip this. Secondly, this is called Smokin Aces 2, but from its apparent direct-to-DVD release status, you can expect that Jeremy Piven and other big cast members like Ray Liotta didn't show up. However, Tommy Flanagan (the guy from the first movie who changes his face) has a reprisal. We see Vinnie Jones of Snatch fame (Bullet-tooth Tony) playing the usual hit-man/tough man. Tom Berenger is easily the best, as he plays the target of a large assassination contract for his head. The movie is a sequel, but it has nothing to do with the Buddy Aces Israel storyline (though his name is mentioned once, I guess just to get SOME sort of movie-verse continuity). Like the first, Smokin Aces 2 sets up the assassination contract, but the storyline is not even close to as appealing and creative as the first. You do get to see the rival assassins preparing and scheming to be first to claim the prize, however unlike SA-1, there is no creative twist to how they all converge on the target. Instead you just get a boring shootout with some very (VERY) far-fetched comical interludes (All I'll say is exploding midget clowns). A terrible script, terrible storyline, a worse ending, yet somehow the first half of the movie was tolerable. If you're a male who likes guns and boobs, you'll likely be able to sit through this. Autumn Reeser shows some skin, as does Martha Higareda, someone I had not known until this movie. It's still a 2/10. One point for guns, the other for naked ladies. I'm pretty sure 99.9% of females will despise this movie, and any male not enamored with action/nudity probably will too.

• Meaningless action

  raggsokkn2010-01-09

  Good but not as great as the first one. Vinnie Jones is as always a crazy bad-ass, an other old-school bad-ass in this movie is Tom Berenger from The Substitute, this movies sex-appeal comes from the two beautiful girls; Autumn Reeser aka Kaitlin 'AK-47' Tremor and Martha Higareda that both acted good. The movie is about Walter Weed who's getting hunted down by a bunch of assassins. Walter Weed is an FBI analyst who in the start of the movie is told by some FBI people that there's some criminals out to get him. After this the FBI brings him to a safe location where they are attacked by all of the assassins. The movie has no what so ever meaningful dialogs but the action is god. It's full of fun action, beautiful girls and meaningless violence. In other words not great but OK for watching with some beer and buddies...

• Missing the point

  milanstanojevic2010-02-10

  OK, I am posting this as it seems that too many people reviewing this have completely missed the point. First, the Special Effects: Yes they were done the way they were (badly, with a comic slant) on purpose. For two reasons. One, they were emulating British gangster flicks (for reasons of budget or style - your guess) - and second they were following a particular anarchist film style which you may be familiar with - Natural Born Killers anyone? Or perhaps you think Mr. Oliver Stone was also being cheap with the special effects? The scene of the rednecks tooing and froin in the truck with the background changing the way it did was a direct homage to that film. Second and last - you don't go to a film like this expecting it to solve your pointless existence. You go to have a laugh and hopefully some fun. This film did that pretty good. Too short if you ask me. The director had more ideas then made the screen - I blame the editing :) Cheers

• Not ENTIRELY bad

  RipTheJacker2010-02-07

  A lot of people argue that it has bad acting and bad CGI but forget that this was a straight to video release. With such a limited budget, the film-crew can only do so much so well. Taking everything into account, this film is nothing but a mediocre sequel that could have gone unnoticed with or without its release. With that said, if you ignore some of the minor flaws, it's actually a decent flick. The acting and CG are NOT bad, they're simply mediocre and can be somewhat forgiving when you take into account the budget. If you can an open mind you will hardly notice anything wrong with the GC, and of course if you go into watching this film you shouldn't expect very much from the acting. What is disappointed, though, is the fact that the premise of the film is simply there to do everything the first film did; and not necessarily better. This film doesn't add or remove anything, it simply plays it VERY safe. The whole assassins after bounty direction is kept intact, and it's VERY unfortunate that most of the assassins share VERY similar characteristics with the previous film's assassins; some even make returns. It's so similar it's actually quite striking. Putting the bad aside, it has the typical over the top'guy-movie' flare that the first film had. It has guns, women, sex, violence, and plenty of blood to go around. Some of the action scenes seem a bit overboard, such as shooting exploding midget clowns out of a cannon, but that's what one can come to expect from a movie with such flare. The action never slows down, and the plot twists keep on rolling back and forth. OVERALL: If you have seen the first movie, you have pretty much seen the second movie. That's not to say you shouldn't watch this film. This film is best enjoyed if you can simply tune out every bit of your brain and simply enjoy the movie. Don't worry about the GC, don't worry about the acting, don't worry about plot-holes, don't worry about what's changed since the first movie, just watch the movie for what it's worth: an over the top sequel to an action flick for guys (and maybe gals too). I gave this movie a 6/10. Nothing special; a bit above mediocre at best, but still enjoyable.