The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard

Positives:

• As a comedy thriller, it does pass the '6 laughs test' in terms of the 'comedy' element. Some of these are minor chuckles. A few are really good belly laughs.

• Among these are some of the outrageous tirades of Salma Hayek: her accent makes some of the dialogue unintelligible, but given its X-rated nature, that's not necessarily a bad thing! As a mid-50's actress (Oh God - - don't tell her I mentioned her age!), Ms Hayek indeed has an arrestingly attractive form.

• Seeing Antonio Banderas and Morgan Freeman on the screen is never anything other than a positive. (Although Banderas is like Sean Connery in failing to tailor his natural accent to any role he's ever in!)

Negatives:

• A general problem I have with 'comedy thrillers' is that the comedy nearly always negates any of the thrills. Ryan Reynolds is not playing Deadpool in this one, although he might as well be doing so based on the number of times he is hit by cars and other solid objects. The result is that although it has the trappings of a Bond or a Bourne - exotic locations (here, mostly Italian ones) ; exotic woman; car chases; heavily-armed henchmen; huge explosions - it delivers none of the tension or excitement. When matched with some rather dodgy post-shoot special effects, the effect is generally underwhelming.

• The plot here is shallow and ludicrous. A McGuffin involving a diamond drill tunnelling into "Europe's data hub" to implant a virus is infantile.

• If there was an award for the clumsiest movie title of 2021, we may already have a winner.

Summary Thoughts on "The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard": Sequels are very occasionally better. Often they are much worse. This one, I have to say, delivers very much "more of the same". Given that the writer/director team of Tom O'Connor and Patrick Hughes are in the driving seat, that's not much of a surprise. The shtick is mildly diverting, occasionally downright funny, but quickly outstays its welcome. The 100 minute run time felt, for me, much longer.

Looking back at my 2017 review of the first film, I think I was being over-kind giving it 6/10. I think this is neither better nor worse. So if you want to average the two and give each 5/10, I wouldn't object! But, again, it's one I will struggle to remember much about in a few month's time.

(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web or Facebook. Thanks).

This film is precisely why I enjoyed the first instalment. It's so much fun!

Of course it has some issues which I'll address, but on the whole it's an entertaining, action packed film that is enjoyable in the right areas

So what's the issues? The first 45 mins or so Salma Hayek's character was really annoying. She used that OTT and loud humour which I hate and was just generally quite a jarring character. Luckily, she definitely grows on you and by the end I loved her.

The plot itself for me has one big "flaw". And that's that the villain and the plot to destroy Europe was all just a bit pointless really. The film is designed to focus on the dynamic of the 3 main characters and that's great, but there is next to no depth or info on the villain and the plot he has to destroy Europe. I have literally just turned off the film and I honestly cannot tell you the villains name.

Other than those 2 points the film maintains what made the first film great. Good humour, fun characters and a lot of action. Which, let's be honest, is what you want in an action comedy movie. Ryan Reynolds and Samuel L Jackson maintain that fun chemistry between them and it shows on screen and the added depth with Salma Hayek and Morgan Freeman just added a little more the overall dynamic which was nice.

Was it better than the first movie? I'd edge the first one personally as I found it a bit funnier. But this does keep a decent level of humour and the action is exactly what you want. Was I entertained? Yes. And ultimately that's what I want with this kind of film. 7/10 from me!

My wife and I settled into a nice evening looking for light, funny entertainment, so we spun up this BluRay disc from our public library. We got almost halfway when I hit 'pause' and asked, "Are you enjoying this movie?" She wasn't and I had only gone that far because she was still in the room.

On the surface the story has elements necessary to make an entertaining movie, an unlikely team of three have the task of tracking down the bad guys and saving the world. But we were overwhelmed right away by two big problems:

First all the dialog is filled with filthy language, not just a little but seemingly the script tries to put as much filthy language as is possible. Just for the sake of filling the script with filthy language. All the way through the movie. For us it would be like trying to have a nice steak at a restaurant and the waiter coming by every 30 seconds and spraying pepper sauce into our faces. Now we're not prudes, but when dialog has such pervasive filthy language then soon all meaning goes away because we find ourselves wondering "Why do they think so much filthy language is entertaining?"

The second big problem is one scene after the other after the other with gun battles. From start to finish (I skipped around after the 45 minute mark to get a feel for how the second half of the movie is presented) all we get is shooting and more shooting. Just so much that soon all meaning of the story goes away.

Now we realize some viewers really like this sort of stuff, they are entertained by it, but to us it is a mystery. There are so many good TV shows and movies, how can someone be entertained by this sort of movie? We can't comprehend it.

Banderas is now Greek. And wants to wreck havoc in the EU. Although the movie was (at times) fun and it's cool to see Samuel Jackson and Morgan Freeman in the same film, a star-packed cast can't get this film rated above 6. And 6 is already too much.

Where to start...Pace is inconsistent and compared to the 1st film there are some really boring parts. Action is focused on bang-bang and car chase, coupled with some extreme shouting from Salma Hayek. Acting is ok (if you can stand Hayek).

Storyline is outdated and exaggerated but keeps the European vibe of the first film, which is consistent.

Comedy is prevalent throughout the film and there are some good moments.

And of course...Antonio Banderas: He plays the villain, Greek billionaire Aristotle Papadopoulos, but he doesn't take the role too seriously and he still is the one and only Antonio Banderas, with the one and only Spanish accent we all know. He delivers some funny one-liners mixed with a few popular Greek words and almost looks like a villain BUT with a really weak and bad plan.

Comedian Ryan Reynolds does well in comedy.

Frank Grillo is always a nice addition, even though his role in the film is not essential.

Nice cinematography, photography and great Italian landscapes. And some truly funny moments.

Maybe since they're chasing a Greek, they should have done more shots in Greece, so it could have been more relevant. Because in the overall story the connection with Italy seemed rather weak.

To conclude, there's a few reasons to watch this film. But it's not as good as the previous one, so be prepared.

I personally enjoyed it but it's no more than a 6/10.

Been flicking through a load of the reviews on here and I seriously don't understand the hate. It's just a fun movie, just as crazy as the first one. It doesn't take itself too seriously, the jokes are funny and the action is great. What do you expect from this film? If you want to go and watch a fun, action packed film for an afternoon, go and check it out! If you're expecting some sort of classic, super high budget mind blowing phenomenon, go watch Avatar again or something.