Metascore
24

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 16 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 16
  2. Negative: 13 out of 16
  1. Reviewed by: Ty Burr
    50
    The result isn’t art but it is an improvement: a scurrilous, lowdown, sub-Tarantino action comedy that, unlike the original, doesn’t make you want to claw your eyes out. How’s that for praise?
  2. Reviewed by: Mike Hale
    50
    Like its predecessor, All Saints Day will, if nothing else, be a cult item for Roman Catholic schoolboys; the next sequel, blatantly set up, should arrive no later than 2019.
  3. The only truly ugly side to this self-consciously grimy movie is the streak of Neanderthal humor. Operatic overacting is funny. Racist and homophobic jokes? Not so much.
  4. 38
    You wouldn't call The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day a taut thriller. More like a fleshy, messy, jangled frenzy of shootouts and much discussion about the mechanics of romantic entanglements that bloom between prison inmates.
  5. The Boondock Saints II does, from time to time, display a vulgar charm. Or maybe it just wears you out.
  6. Although the Tarantino influence still is tangible, this time around Duffy reveals himself to also be a big Francis Ford Coppola fan, but the cartoonish end result plays like "Godfather III" meets the Three Stooges.
  7. Reviewed by: Aaron Hillis
    30
    John Woo outgrew stylizing movies like this in the '90s, but Duffy is still chasing his perfect slide-and-shoot, except now with more self-satisfied posturing, awkward pop-culture referencing, casual homophobia and racism, and the most vulgar co-opting of religious iconography this side of Dan Brown.
  8. Reviewed by: Robert Abele
    30
    Duffy tamps down his best instincts -- occasional wry humor and the appealingly oddball supporting character (Willem Dafoe last time, a bug-eyed Clifton Collins Jr. here as the MacManus' admiring Latino cohort) -- and doubles up on his worst: homophobic gags, tedious '90s-era slo-mo shootouts and overwrought gangster tropes.
  9. Reviewed by: Peter Debruge
    30
    Feels larger in scope yet sorely lacking in originality.
  10. 30
    After nine years, Duffy has coughed up a sequel, and like the first movie it's energetic, proudly juvenile, and reverently derivative.
  11. 25
    An idiotic ode to macho horseshite (to employ an ancient Irish word). It is however distinguished by superb cinematography.
  12. Just the same auld same auld.
  13. Reviewed by: Adam Markovitz
    25
    Earns points only for being remarkably unself-conscious about its across-the-board ineptitude.
  14. Only Billy Connolly, as the boys’ way-of-the-gun pa, brings a smidgen of sobering gravitas to the proceedings, though he can hardly counter the pounding hangover brought on by all the mock-virtuous butchery.
  15. Reviewed by: Sam Adams
    16
    Duffy's inept command of actors, not to mention his utterly juvenile morality and his comically clumsy use of religious iconography, should keep all but the diehards away.
  16. 11
    Isn't for everyone, obviously; it might not be for anyone, come to think of it.
User Score
6.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 94 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 35
  2. Negative: 16 out of 35
  1. Aug 23, 2013
    0
    So bad. It's just so damn bad. Not only is it full of the brainless, boring, somehow action-less actions scenes that The Boondock Saints are known for, but everything around those moments is just as terrible. Duffy's attempts at drama and intrigue are laughable. There is not a semblance of development or patience in his story telling. It's like he just said "I want this to happen now" and then just told all of the actors to do it instead of actually spending time and first ensuring that we are invested in the characters and their lives. And the jokes...my word...how unfunny. The only thing that is funny here is the acting which I can't even take seriously. This sh*t is just sloppy and amateurish. There is absolutely nothing good about it. It is painfully stupid. And the worst part about that is that it doesn't know it's stupid. It thinks it's good. It thinks that people are watching it and saying "Wow what he just said was cool" or "Isn't that plot twist awesome" but what most of them are really saying is "...please." As a non film-maker I would never say this about virtually any other movie because I understand that it's probably more difficult than I could imagine...but I could make a better movie than this. In fact, there is no way that I would not if given the chance. Anybody with a brain or even one original thought could make something better than this. It is worthless. Of no value. Without a single redeeming quality or thing to appreciate. Garbage. Whoever contributed to this should be embarrassed. Full Review »
  2. Aug 27, 2010
    0
    Quentin Tarantino has taken some more worthy **** than this movie. Even fans of the first one will find little to cling on to, and bad dialogue makes the already bad acting just plain horrendous. Full Review »
  3. Aug 16, 2010
    1
    1, for a good trailer. As far as the movie, a disappointment. After the first 25 minutes of it I cut it off. Bad acting, terrible jokes, typical story for a sequel. Its like if they were trying too hard to make it like the original, but couldn't hit the right notes. Definitly had the potential to be a very good movie, if it had good movie makers, but this is just another corny sequel. Full Review »