Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising

It's been years since the first "Bad Neighbours" movie. Question is did they really need a sequel? The plot is pretty simple, after a sorority (lead by Shelly (Chloë Grace Moretz)moves in next door, they decide to get help from their previous enemy Teddy Sanders! I'll get down to the negatives first, because I do like to always leave on a good note. This movie was filled with "sexist" and "double standards" and it's repeated over and over again. For example, there are loads of scene where you hear things like "We better not do that, because they're females. We only do that to men." There's comments like that throughout the entire film. It got old fairly quickly. The film is done exactly like the first one. They use the same jokes, the same ideas as before. I guess, for some it isn't a bad thing, but I personally wanted something new. Shelly (Chloë Grace Moretz's) character was all over the place. One minute she seemed liked this nice, beautiful, well respected girl who just wanted to start a party to feel good, then all of a sudden she turns into this evil, selfish, know it all person who just does not give a damn about anybody. They needed to decide who her character was from the start, not change her around halfway through just for the sake of being a bad neighbour!

There are jokes in there that do work as 2 examples of Seth Rogen making a trip to the Sydney Opera House in Australia or Jimmy's clown laugh. Rose Byrne gets into character really well yet again. She provides a few laugh out loud jokes. Zac Efron returns to help the neighbours and, of course to show off his body once again! All in all, there are a lot of good jokes in this movie, but there's also a lot that didn't work and could have been done better! All in all, it's a decent film, but I wouldn't pay to watch it again. 5/10 2/5 stars.

I could take or leave Bad Neighbours like I could take or leave Police Academy - an undemanding, but essentially funny, comedy which delivered the goods in terms of laughs and performances. Like Police Academy, however, you have to ask whether you could make a decent sequel based on such a thin premise.

The answer here is no.

For a start, bearing in mind the contrived way they're crowbarred into events, neither Seth Rogan or Rose Byrne actually contribute any significant to the plot or develop as characters; in fact, their appearances amounts to little more than glorified cameos, and strained ones at that; and although Byrne actually tries (and is OK for it), Rogan appears happy to coast it - indulged by a script and director who are unable (or unwilling) to actually give him something to do.

Zac Efron's storyline is actually more interestng; the former college golden boy, now cast adrift and vulnerable after his graduation; unfortunately, rather than dwell on his (self inflicted) misfortunes he is soon submerged into Chloe Grace Moretz's and co's train wreck of an all female frat house....and almost as quickly jettisoned, in yet another plot contrivance, so he can join forces with Byrne and Rogan.

How much of the film's social commentary is true of the US today I cannot say - I know about much about the in and outs of American Universities as I do about US property laws - but I seriously doubt that today's frat houses are run like crossovers between strip bars, sawdust joints and National Lampoon's Animal House (a far funnier film, incidentally).

The film has a fairly liberal agenda and various social hypocracies are railed against - in relation to dope smoking, alcohol abuse, arbitrary law enforcement, moral panics and treatment of women...but the alternatives proposed here (if you can call them that) in today's climate are uncomfortable to watch, or inappropriate, are out of tune with the supposed values being pushed. And they are just downright unfunny for the most part, as is the endless bad language.

The film tries to tick so many boxes, it soon loses focus on what the storyline is actually supposed to be about. Byrne, Efron and Selena Gomez (in a small cameo) actual get pass marks for decent performances...but the rest is a confused, lazy attempt to retread the first part.

I hope there's no part 3.

Who thought of the concept of "buckets of money"? That is idiotic in the extreme. A bucket of pennies is worth much less than a bucket of $100 dollar bills (stuffed tight). Nobody in their right mind would rent a house based on "buckets of money." They would always insist on a set dollar amount. I'm willing to suspend disbelief about everything else in the movie, but that is too much.

I'm serious, literally no one in the theater laughed. There were a very few chuckles but not a single laugh. The movie was like torture because they kept using the same joke over and over and over again. A joke that wasn't funny the first time it was used was delivered multiple times. The first Neighbors movie was funny, not the funniest movie made or anything like that but pretty funny. This movie is beyond lame. Remember when I told you they kept using the same jokes over and over again? There was literally a 10 minute timeframe in which the movie used the same joke about 5 times. Around that time I looked at my watch and saw that I was only 20 MINUTES INTO THE STUPID MOVIE! Basically, the problem with this movie is that it isn't funny and kept reusing the same jokes. They even use jokes from the original movie multiple times. It was just plain sad. Another thing, I think SETH ROGEN HAS BECOME THE NEW ADAM SANDLER. He keeps playing the same character in very single movie, and he has finally and completely wore out his welcome. This will be the final time I pay money to see a Seth Rogen movie. Another thing I learned is that Chloë Grace Moretz is officially an awful actress. Everyone loved her as Hit-Girl and ever since KickAss she has gotten a free pass from everyone (including myself) but in this movie we get to see a ton of her acting and it is like watching rejected scenes from a TWILIGHT MOVIE. You get sick of her after about 40 minutes. Man, I know everyone involved in this movie did it for a paycheck but I think it is ultimately going to hurt more than a few careers. I WARN YOU, SAVE YOUR MONEY AND DO NOT PAY A PENNY TO WATCH THIS MOVIE. IT SUCKS. You've been warned.

In the 2014 "Neighbors" my comment was, "It is sad to see Seth Rogen prostituting himself for money. I saw him in the 2011 "Take This Waltz" in a non-comedic role and he was excellent. But most of his roles are like the one here, sophomoric and dirty humor that is only humorous to the crowd that likes dirty humor."

I can say the same thing about this sequel, "Neighbors 2". Frankly the only reason I watched it, on BluRay from my public library, was to see Chloe Grace Moretz, who plays the role of an incoming freshman who decides to establish her own sorority after she learns that existing sororities are not allowed to have parties, and frat parties are not very good. To me her participation is wasted.

There are a couple of funny parts, starting in the first scene when Rogan's pregnant wife vomits all over his face during sex. Vomiting all over Rogan's face is a good use of that type of humor. Then there was the time he put on the brakes and the girl hiding in the back seat went through his windshield and into the street. Then there was the scene where Rogen and Efron were jumping on car airbags to try to get out of a garage they were locked in.

But the vast majority of the movie is just a very lame story and unfunny scenes filled as much as possible with filthy language. No, not a movie I would recommend to anyone. Any rating above "3" is bogus.