Mike M

Read Ahparayam White‘a review for a thorough and accurate analysis of this horrid film. I have to add just a few things to it: In what world is a 30 something year old man — who is the country’s most famous actor and has a dating history longer than a CVS receipt — going to fall for an elderly single mom pushing 60? To remedy this glaring improbability, several scenes attempted to mitigate the ridiculousness of this concept. Firstly, Nicole Kidman is 57 and Zac Efron is 36. I didn’t graduate from MIT but I reckon that’s a 21 year difference. However, one scene alluded to Zac Efron’s character being 34 and 16 years younger than Nicole Kidman’s character, making her 50. Secondly, not once but twice did Joey King’s character’s best friend (forcefully) allude to Nicole Kidman’s character’s physique being pristine. Aside from simply being not true, this was a sad and blatant attempt to confuse the viewer into thinking Nicole Kidman’s character was worthy of the attention she was being given by the young stud. Truly, I feel very bad for the cast. Nicole Kidman used to be considered an A-list actor, I think, yet is now starring in roles like this? Times must be rough for her. Zac Efron, too, was once a respected actor albeit mostly appealing to a younger demographic. He now seemingly plays the dumb jock type in most of his films. Then there’s Joey King whose movies are all like this one, so kudos to her for mill pumping yet another bland romantic comedy that fails to leave the viewer with any emotion. At least she’ll be able to tell people she worked with Nicole Kidman. Overall, this seemed like a movie whose hidden message was to empower women but did so in a very roundabout way. Even the way the mostly female cast spoke to and treated Zac Efron’s character seemed cutting. I do not recommend this movie unless you’re looking for something to have on in the background.

Man, I was disappointed by this movie. I loved the first one and was ecstatic to see the sequel. Unfortunately, this movie lost nearly all the charm that made the first one so good; was riddled with plot holes; and most of all, suffered from a severe lack of Samara Weaving. LACK OF CHARM The first film was filled with cute, gimmicky scenes (think video game style scenes). As a grown man in his late 20s, I would think it would be nearly impossible to be intrigued by a movie starring a little boy. But the charm made it happen. There was a slight sense of humor in many of the scenes and it kept the viewer interested. In this movie, however, nearly all charm was gone. Some scenes tried too hard to be charming, specifically the fight scene between the two love interests (boring). I also cringed at Phoebe’s introduction scene as it felt overly forced. I can only imagine how awkward it was rehearsing that scene over and over. The entire movie was just too one-dimensional and didn’t feel special like the first. PLOT HOLES First off, the entire premise of the movie is that nobody believes Cole that the events of the first movie happened, since Bee did such a stupendous job cleaning up everything. Was everyone there ignoring the fact that Bee just disappeared? Did that not raise any flags? What about the fact that four other teenagers were gone as well as two cops? I could go on about this but it was immediately apparent that the viewer just had to accept this major flaw in order to get the sequel, I guess. Secondly, Mel going evil made no sense. Literally zero. I understand that it was supposed to be a dramatic twist, but come on. She says that she joined the cult because she “wants to be an influencer.” Wow, how creative. We are soon after shown a scene where Bee is egging on Mel to want more and more followers, which suggests that Bee is the mastermind behind all of the cast’s resurgences. Okay, that make sense. But later, it is revealed that Bee cleverly set all those people up in order to protect Cole and Phoebe. So...Bee turned Mel evil in order to save Cole and Phoebe from Mel? Makes no sense. The same applies for all the other evil characters. Bee was the instigator and also their undoing. SAMARA WEAVING Okay, here it is. Nearly all of the reasons that the first movie was great was based on Samara Weaving playing Bee. She was this cool, slick, sexy in-charge chick. She made the first movie what it was. But in this one, she didn’t really make an appearance until the final fifteen minutes and even then it was only a shell of her former self. She seemed emotionless, timid, and downright uncomfortable. It was incredibly disappointing to see such wasted potential. Perhaps most curious was how Bee was Mel’s babysitter. On the one hand, it was neat how there was some explanation toward how Bee became the evil person she was, but it also felt like a giant cop out of a storyline. There are several other things wrong with this movie that I didn’t get to, but the disappointment is currently overtaking me from writing anymore. Overall, there are so many other directions a sequel could have taken based on the first’s ending. This movie was a C+ at best and I would caution fans of the first to take heed when watching this, and perhaps avoid it altogether in order to maintain the integrity of the first movie.