Same song, different day.
And that's no bad thing. There are things to like here, a lot of fun actually (shout out to Keegan Michael-Key), but where the first felt refreshing, different, this sequel strains to be bigger and better. And it didn't need to be. The first relied on sharp humor and sly character development. Here, those seem to be sacrificed in favor of more jokes and gags. Granted, there's not much more they can do with these characters,…
Warm, sweet, inviting, and so very English. It manages to be a great family film because there's an obvious love behind the ones making it; it also manages to be funny without being dumb about it. Not to mention, it's impeccably designed across the board. How can you not love this movie...
“ I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist, a theoretical philosopher, but above all I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man just like you." – Lancaster Dodd
Much like his character Mr. Dodd, Paul Thomas Anderson seems to be hopelessly inquisitive, and thus a confounding, enigmatic auteur and artist… which makes it hard to believe he is a big name Hollywood director. Take away Terrence Malick, and he’s probably the closest director Hollywood has that has not…
Its technical achievement is stupendous: 95 minutes, one shot. What it manages to say in that 95 minutes may be even greater as it manages to capture the ideas of life, existence, art, death, history being in the past, moving on, moving forward all within its images, camera movements, and dialogue between our unshown narrator and the man in black guide. It's a extraordinary film, one that deserves to rank amongst the greatest in cinema for its technical mastery which matches its grandiose representation of ideas. This is what great film/art is about.