Smokin' Aces 2: Assassins' Ball (2010 Video) User Reviews

Average at Best

[majormadmax · 4/10 · 11 February 2010]

OK, I won't even compare this movie with the 'original,' as there really is no connection between the two. Well, other than the one assassin and the fact that the FBI is the main government agency involved.

So, standing on its own, the best that could be said of 'Smokin' Aces II - Assassins' Ball' is that it is mildly entertaining if you like movies of this genre.

By that I mean lots of gunfire, blood, gore and a few hot women.

Otherwise, the script is weak, the plot weaker, and the acting...well, it can barely be called acting.

By itself, 'Smokin' Aces II' rates four stars at best. You can save yourself some money and wait until it hits the discount bins, you won't be missing anything by doing so. But do pick it up when it gets marked down, especially if you like these kind of brainless shoot-'em-up flicks!

I liked the first one, but this one is really terrible.

[Matt_Layden · 4/10 · 11 May 2010]

Pretty much the same plot as the first one. Someone has put out a hit on another person and dozens of highly skilled assassins are called in to take him out. Bullets fly, bodies fall and the story doesn't seem all that it was suppose to be.

I'm one of a few people who really dug Smokin Aces. It had great quirky characters, good action when it was actually happening and it showed Ryan Reynolds can do more than just comedy. People seemed to complain that it was thin on story, needed more action, and deserved a better twist. Well, I am putting all those complaints to the second film, which is actually a prequel.

Smokin' Aces 2: Assassins Ball is a cheap direct to DVD cashing in on the name, quick and dirty film. The production values are pretty low rent and the acting suits it. Vinnie Jones is the biggest name draw and he is hardly in the film. They plaster his face all over the poster and he honestly doesn't belong there. In fact, one of the main characters isn't even on the poster. He's not recognizable enough. Tom Berenger plays the character who has the contract out on him and a special team of agents must protect him. So they take him to a vault, highly protected and assure him no one can get in. Sure enough, dozens of crazy hit men show up and that's when things go from bad to worse.

The Tremor family makes a return, minus Captain Kirk and Martin Keamy (Star Trek and Lost fans can attest). They kept the least interesting brother, the one who obviously needed the money, and introduce three new Tremor characters. The crazy sister, the dumb bigger brother and the hillbilly father. None of these new tremor characters are as interesting as the two missing. The film tries to fill that void, but it fails. Instead the fans get a poor imitation of one of the better aspects of the first film.

The action is lame and never feels as frantic as it should. The cheap explosions are goofy and laughable. We never get a chance to connect to any of the characters. In the first film, I was picking my favourite hit men, this one I had none. None of them are as cool, or as memorable.

The twist is lame and makes little to no sense. The writing of the film was slacking and obviously written so quickly to get the film into production that people must have really not read it. The director P.J. Pesce, seems to specialize in direct to video films. It shows, since he has no theatrical vision and the film feels very confined to its obvious production costs.

If you hated the first film, thought it was decent or just liked it, I would advise you to skip this one. I only recommend it if you are truly a die hard fan. Even then, I say proceed with caution.

Different director, different actors, different result ...

[imdb-21254 · 3/10 · 10 January 2010]

I really, really liked Smokin Aces, and i was excited to go watch this sequel, featuring my favorite UK actor Vinnie Jones, who always gives violent movies this little extra just be his appearance.

As so often with sequels, this one just doesn't cut it - it is nowhere near as well-acted, intense and spectacular as the original.

The story features some of the assassins from part 1, but they have been cramped into the plot in an awkward way this time - without giving away too much, it's rather unbelievable. Their methods seem dull after watching part 1, and the addition of the new assassins doesn't make up for that at all.

Bad, b-movie style acting and extremely bad CGI (explosions!) take up the remaining 1.5 hours, until the foreseeable-from-minute-1 plot-twist kicks in.

Loads of plot holes, bad dialogs and unexplained sudden character-developments makes me rate this 3/10 unfortunately.

TLDR: Don't bother, grab it once its out on DVD

Takes all the good out of the original and throws it away

[zzmasta · 2/10 · 10 January 2010]

I was sent an advance copy of this movie on DVD. I enjoyed the first Smokin Aces and I had no problem spending 90 minutes on this one. Firstly, there's tons of gratuitous violence and nudity. If that's not your thing, skip this.

Secondly, this is called Smokin Aces 2, but from its apparent direct-to-DVD release status, you can expect that Jeremy Piven and other big cast members like Ray Liotta didn't show up. However, Tommy Flanagan (the guy from the first movie who changes his face) has a reprisal. We see Vinnie Jones of Snatch fame (Bullet-tooth Tony) playing the usual hit-man/tough man. Tom Berenger is easily the best, as he plays the target of a large assassination contract for his head.

The movie is a sequel, but it has nothing to do with the Buddy Aces Israel storyline (though his name is mentioned once, I guess just to get SOME sort of movie-verse continuity). Like the first, Smokin Aces 2 sets up the assassination contract, but the storyline is not even close to as appealing and creative as the first. You do get to see the rival assassins preparing and scheming to be first to claim the prize, however unlike SA-1, there is no creative twist to how they all converge on the target. Instead you just get a boring shootout with some very (VERY) far-fetched comical interludes (All I'll say is exploding midget clowns).

A terrible script, terrible storyline, a worse ending, yet somehow the first half of the movie was tolerable. If you're a male who likes guns and boobs, you'll likely be able to sit through this. Autumn Reeser shows some skin, as does Martha Higareda, someone I had not known until this movie.

It's still a 2/10. One point for guns, the other for naked ladies. I'm pretty sure 99.9% of females will despise this movie, and any male not enamored with action/nudity probably will too.

Bad, But Not So Bad It's Good.

[bodiebob-632-909960 · 2/10 · 28 January 2010]

What an awful film, the whole concept was absurd. It's one of the dumbest movies I've seen and the way they tried to dress it up as some 'Usual Suspects' style work of genius was laughable. Everything to do with the four morons in the truck (especially the clowns) would ruin any film and the plot was full of holes. Wilful suspension of disbelief is one thing but this required suspension of all intelligence.

There are none of the big stars of the first movie. Vinnie Jones, who's improving as an actor and I want to like, still cannot deliver a line without sounding like he's reading it from a script for the first time and Tom Berenger is clearly desperate to be accepted by Hollywood again if he is taking parts like this. I bet he was very well behaved on set this time.

Bizarrely though, this had one of the best last ten seconds of a movie I've ever seen, which is all that stopped me giving it a rating of one but by then the film was beyond redemption and it was wasted. If it had been put on the end of a decent film it would have gone down as one of the all time classic endings, it was that good an idea. Now it will just be forgotten on the end of a bit of straight to DVD garbage, which is nothing short of tragic.

Not ENTIRELY bad

[RipTheJacker · 6/10 · 7 February 2010]

A lot of people argue that it has bad acting and bad CGI but forget that this was a straight to video release. With such a limited budget, the film-crew can only do so much so well. Taking everything into account, this film is nothing but a mediocre sequel that could have gone unnoticed with or without its release.

With that said, if you ignore some of the minor flaws, it's actually a decent flick. The acting and CG are NOT bad, they're simply mediocre and can be somewhat forgiving when you take into account the budget. If you can an open mind you will hardly notice anything wrong with the GC, and of course if you go into watching this film you shouldn't expect very much from the acting.

What is disappointed, though, is the fact that the premise of the film is simply there to do everything the first film did; and not necessarily better. This film doesn't add or remove anything, it simply plays it VERY safe. The whole assassins after bounty direction is kept intact, and it's VERY unfortunate that most of the assassins share VERY similar characteristics with the previous film's assassins; some even make returns. It's so similar it's actually quite striking.

Putting the bad aside, it has the typical over the top'guy-movie' flare that the first film had. It has guns, women, sex, violence, and plenty of blood to go around. Some of the action scenes seem a bit overboard, such as shooting exploding midget clowns out of a cannon, but that's what one can come to expect from a movie with such flare. The action never slows down, and the plot twists keep on rolling back and forth.

OVERALL: If you have seen the first movie, you have pretty much seen the second movie. That's not to say you shouldn't watch this film. This film is best enjoyed if you can simply tune out every bit of your brain and simply enjoy the movie. Don't worry about the GC, don't worry about the acting, don't worry about plot-holes, don't worry about what's changed since the first movie, just watch the movie for what it's worth: an over the top sequel to an action flick for guys (and maybe gals too).

I gave this movie a 6/10. Nothing special; a bit above mediocre at best, but still enjoyable.

A sequel to Aces could have been great. This isn't.

[JimD73 · 3/10 · 28 February 2010]

I must admit, despite being lukewarm to it at first, Smokin Aces 1 became one of my favourite bad movies. Lots of shooting, random cool characters and kinetic energy, despite the second half not being as awesome as it could have been. Smokin Aces 2 took basically the same concept, a bunch of assassins after a single target, and takes a lot of the life of it. While I didn't like the first much either the first time, I highly doubt 2 will get better if I have the misfortune of seeing it again.

When I say Aces 2 has the same concept, I mean down to the last detail almost. A hit is put out on desk jockey Walter Weed, and a large group of high profile assassins come out of hiding to attempt to score the bounty on his head. A protagonist FBI agent (even with the same goatee) is assigned to protect him, and not all is quite as it seems. Even some of the twists (notably the end scene, which is awesome anyways I must admit) are right out of the book of Aces 1. That being said, I really did like the plot twist at the end regarding who set up the hit, even if the leadup was a bit convoluted. I just wish it was used in a better movie.

But this is straight-to-DVD fare, so who needs that much of a plot? Aces 1 was such a cool concept, trying it again can't hurt. However, that would rely on having new cool assassins, and this bunch falls flat. The sole spot of awesomeness is Tommy Flanagan reprising his role from the first as Lazlow Soot, master of disguise. Vinnie Jones is an amazing actor for a movie like this, but his character is unimpressive (his introcutory scene comes across as Saw-like almost) and his screen time is far too short. A female assassin is brought in as sex appeal, but is otherwise useless.

Then there's the Tremors, who made the first movie for some. Except this time, only one of the originals returns, Maury Sterling (aka the unmemorable one). Gone are Chris Pine's psychotic laments and Kevin Durand's intimidating bullheadedness with a chainsaw. They are replaced with a new brother, a sister and the father. Michael Parks is suitable as Fritz Tremor, although more of him would have been welcomed. Baby Boy Tremor is just annoyingly dull, like something out of a Rocky and Bullwinkle cartoon. AK-47 Tremor is possibly the worst movie character ever imagined, an annoying little woman whose sole moment in the film is when she is shot in the head (spoilers anyone?). That and they contribute the most head-shakingly bad weapon ever: exploding clowns.

The direction in the film tries hard to be like the first, involving lots of 24-style splitscreens, which can be cool at times but messy at others. The action scenes are an exercise in getting stuff blown up and minor characters offed quickly. At least the one time someone goes into the fray guns blazing, things end badly, causing me immense laughter at the stupidity.

Aces 2 has its entertaining moments, but overall its a mess of a movie that pales to the original. Aces 1 surely had a concept that could be reused and possibly done better, but Aces 2 just confirms that its not as easy as it looks.

Someone give Tommy Flanagan a better role.

Did others watch it before reviewing?

[thezombieking15 · 7/10 · 7 June 2010]

I feel like most of the votes for Smokin' Aces 2 were given without an actual viewing of the movie. I'll admit, as soon as I heard there would be a sequel (which turned out to be a prequel) I wasn't happy, and wanted to rate it badly myself. I feel as though most people shared my sentiment, but rated the film without actually watching it first. I feel it's at very least in the category of a 6, with the original Aces at at least a 7 on IMDb. I suppose viewers just don't feel the way I do. Now, about the film...

Aces 2 was... different from the first film. Most notably, no real names here. Jeremy Piven and Ryan Reynolds are gone. It's a big loss, but if you consider Aces 2 to be a similar story without actually RELATING it to the first film, it becomes a lot more fun. Aces 2 has a style of it's own, different from the original. Where Aces 1 had smooth music and a flowing story, a style all it's own, Aces 2 has rock music and probably more swearing. The Tremors family appear again, but this time around, it's only Lester and a few others you could honestly care less about. The setup is entertaining, the shootouts are fair enough, and the humor (Tremors family related) is fun if you can get past the bizarre nature of it all. Aces 2 is far from realistic, and there are enough plot holes to sink a boat, but it really isn't a bad film. Certainly not intelligent like the first, but eh. Watch the film, don't relate it to the original, and at very least, WAIT for the ending. The final moments will make the entire film worth it, if nothing else.

A weak attempt to cash in on the original Smokin' Aces

[Siamois · 3/10 · 12 January 2010]

Joe Carnahan's original Smokin' Aces was received with mixed feelings but a very fine piece of entertainment in itself. The original owed a lot to black crime comedies in the style of Guy Ritchie.

This sequel/prequel/crapquel is only produced by Carnahan. He passes the directing helm to P.J. Pesce. A quick look at this "director" credit list on IMDb will tell you exactly what to expect. Assassin's Ball is diluted in every way imaginable. First, it is only very loosely connected to the original. One can guess the superb and eclectic cast from the original was probably not easy to secure and so, in an attempt to cash in, they came up with a pitiful excuse of a story which tries to keep the theme of assassins all after the same target. But the story brings nothing new and is in fact inferior. The new characters are dumbed down versions of the old ones and the acting quality is also down from he previous effort.

There are sequences in this film that will make you cringe. For instance, a man is shot and the cheap-o blood splatter digital effect goes in an absolutely WRONG, gravity and logic- defying direction. And this single example encapsulates the weak sense of direction on display here.

How could the producer, a man who has shot miraculously cool indie flicks and also a masterpiece such as Narc actually OK any of this? Did Carnahan just cash the check and not control the quality here?

My other reviews will demonstrate I rarely am emotional about films when I review them but here, I must point out how disappointed I am with Assassin's Ball. Although the original was not greatness on film, it had heart, quality direction and a certain unique quality to it. How can Carnahan, who once was headed to great things after Narc, be reduced to a producer role on such garbage? This once great director saw several of his rumored projects scrapped, given to others or go in limbo.

I once felt he would be one of the next great directors and writers of Hollywood but with this offering, I now have serious doubt about Carnahan and he no longer resides on my "must see" list. As for director Pesce, this is without a doubt the last movie from this guy I ever watch.

I'm giving it a 3 solely because of the few entertaining bits they sucked from the original.

Missing the point

[milanstanojevic · 8/10 · 10 February 2010]

OK, I am posting this as it seems that too many people reviewing this have completely missed the point.

First, the Special Effects: Yes they were done the way they were (badly, with a comic slant) on purpose. For two reasons. One, they were emulating British gangster flicks (for reasons of budget or style - your guess) - and second they were following a particular anarchist film style which you may be familiar with - Natural Born Killers anyone? Or perhaps you think Mr. Oliver Stone was also being cheap with the special effects? The scene of the rednecks tooing and froin in the truck with the background changing the way it did was a direct homage to that film.

Second and last - you don't go to a film like this expecting it to solve your pointless existence. You go to have a laugh and hopefully some fun. This film did that pretty good.

Too short if you ask me. The director had more ideas then made the screen - I blame the editing :) Cheers

Entertaining and good fun. Worth a rental for sure.

[phoneeko · 6/10 · 28 January 2010]

Thou not even close to its predecessor, this movie is quite watchable and entertaining. Pretty big cast doing a bit less than what could be expected from such actors, given the decent script, although the dialog was surely not the greatest.. everything was there for some better exposition and back-story. Maybe 20 minutes more runtime might have done the trick. You could see the reduced budget, especially during the explosions and in choice of music. Budget (as most of the time) surely influenced the total feel of the movie.. which seemed a bit rushed and unpolished, and also the pressure (from Exec Producer J.C. maybe?) to follow the visual style of the first movie so closely...looks like it was a bit too much. All in all it's still a decent / fun movie, could have been much better (like so many big-budget releases) but still manages to be fairly entertaining.

Much much worse than the original movie

[arriva · 1/10 · 9 January 2010]

First of all and most of all, this movie was shot entirely for TV - lousy camera work, very bad acting, bad script, irregularly paced and silly few plot twists.

Characters are not developed, special effects (of e.g. explosives) look highly unrealistic as if the budget was cut in the middle of production.

Also closer to the end of the film the scriptwriters inserted a three minutes needless love story which ended quite abruptly.

Don't waste your time on this even if you liked the original movie - I couldn't make myself finish watching it.

a turgid mess

[Spaceygirl · 1/10 · 3 April 2010]

No, seriously, this is AWFUL! It's easily the worst movie I've seen this year. It has a terrible script peppered with one-liners and riddled with plot-holes and the acting? Omigod, the acting! For shame Tom Berenger, that you have to be reduced from almost-Oscar-glory to this. For shame! Vinnie Jones turns in his usual English-thug performance, so no surprise there. The movie bears no resemblance to the original. I suspect that the few positive reviews here are either from male, pre- pubescent boys and sad lonely men who get their kicks out of watching bad actresses take their clothes off or brainless gorms who can't follow a movie unless it has running and guns and stuff exploderising every three minutes. Not worth your time. Avoid at all costs.

My 311th Review: I normally like the genre but this, this stinks....

[intelearts · 1/10 · 28 January 2010]

Wow what a dog of a movie - I guess they bought the rights to the title but this as far from a sequel as it's possible to get.

The only good thing here are the actor who runs the jazz club and Vinnie Jones who really deserves better (Sorry but having breasts and a push-up bra doesn't not make either of the two female leads any better or anymore watchable).

I like cheesy assassin films - the Tournament, Wanted, Shoot'Em Up, because they are ironic and self-mocking: this, this has none of that - honestly whatever camel's behind it came shooting out of it should return again ashamed.

This really is a by the numbers no imagination just recycle what you think will sell marketing ploy. Both the director and the writers should have prices put on their heads for selling this granola to the public......

even Vinny Jones sucked in this one

[petermckn · 2/10 · 4 March 2017]

oh Jesus this film where to start? I have never seen the original smoking aces but I saw this in a charity shop and thought why not the original is meant to be great. The plot itself I have no problem with bunch of killers hired to kill a guy they all want him but only one can cash in the reward. The writing, however was poor.

The blonde girl was like a really annoying version of Sheri Moon Zombie (who I don't mind)and all the stupid forced lines that her family make just really annoys me. Vinny Jones came across as some sort of softie and falls in love with this girl he has just met in a bar which makes no sense. The FBI seem more incompetent than the are in real life if that's possible.

The effects were god awful there are these terrible explosions that look like it was done in powerpoint. You know the kind that explodes and leaves no damage and it looks like it's just shoved on top of the background. There are CGI chairs blowing up which looks terrible and even the gunfire looks like a student project. This has put me off watching the original which is so highly regarded I like cheap B movies but this is abysmal. Would not recommend.

What's with all the one-liners?!?

[rudiedirkx · 7/10 · 21 January 2010]

Though not nearly as well directed, well acted (or casted) or well written as Smokin' Aces, this movie is not too horrible to watch. It's got a decent story and progressing nicely, it's not too predictable (not much more than any other movie these days). Expecting not too much, I'm definitely not disappointed.

One thing bothered me more and more though: the enormously annoying, cheesy one-liners! First it was just agent Baker with the dumb-ass comments and group cheers, but then everybody was spouting bad one-liners!

Another thing that was a total letdown and seriously a SHAME for any self respecting artist in the movie industry: the "special effects". If intended as fake as they look: congratulations on a job well done. If not: OMG, Mr Director, did you even watch this movie yourself??

It's a solid 7, because in spite of the annoyances this movie was very watchable and entertaining. These days entertaining is all you can hope for. Not the very best "part two" ever, but most definitely somewhere in the top 20% (although I'm not sure that's saying much qualitatively).

This film assassinated itself.

[Niik_Flix · 2/10 · 13 January 2016]

This movie really had some potential. They had actors that have been known to be very decent. But this script was absolute garbage, the quips and humor was dull and stupid, and the protagonist of the film is stale and not very believable. At the end of this movie I found myself wondering what the point of this was. Don't get me wrong, I'm an action junkie and I enjoy intentionally stereotypical, over the top, comic bookish characters, but these were terrible. The only two assassins you get interested in are killed off in the blink of an eye leaving the stupidest ones left to finish the movie. One group of assassins is a clan of biker/redneck… people. Their clothing looks so new I cant take them seriously. They end up stealing a circus trailer so they can use the cannon to launch live clowns strapped with dynamite into a building. It almost sounds funny but it's shot horrendously. Which leads me to my next point. Don't use explosions if you can't do them right. These were the worst effects I've seen in a long time. There were unnecessary scenes where you could tell they used a green screen; many of them were used while the redneck clan was driving around. This was just all around disappointing. Which is a shame because the locations, lighting, and choreography for some of these shootouts were absolutely gorgeous! That is the only thing keeping me from giving this movie 1 star.

Not a bad movie at all. Far better than most reviews say.

[chazzy1864 · 6/10 · 14 December 2011]

This movie is not bad at all. For starters, I was well aware it was a straight to video movie. IMDb makes that clear with the (video) annunciation in the listing. So I didn't expect the production value to be anywhere close to the original. Also, it is not a *sequel*. Early on you realize this is in fact, a prequel.

I was a huge fan of the first one; very good action movie. I expected a lower budget form of it in this. That is essentially what you get. The styling of the movie is different. That doesn't mean it is bad.

If you are someone who actually pays attention to detail, you will probably enjoy a few things in this movie. There is more connections made in this movie than just the title name and the appearance of Lazlo Soot (apparently the majority of reviews think those are the only connections).

There is mention of both Buddy Israel and Primo Sparazza, just for names-sake. Yes, Lazlo is in fact, in it. You learn a little bit about Lestor Tremor's (one of the three Tremor Brothers from the first) past. You also find out some interesting details about Beanie (from Israel's entourage.

Really, they are all small details that neither make nor break the movie. Those are more there to make you smile as a fan of the first one.

The movie is a solid 6 for a relatively mindless action w/ a few decent twists and laughable parts. Especially given it being a straight to video movie. With that in mind, it is actually really good for what it is.

Don't waste your time...

[r-chrystal · 4/10 · 12 January 2010]

Here is a very brief review of the first movie (or at least what i thought of it) - Brilliant. Plenty of action, developed characters, good story line, nicely paced and well directed and acted.

Here is a very brief review of this movie - terrible.

Why you ask? Mainly because it has nothing that the original movie had. Admittedly this film doesn't have the budget that the original had, but the way that it falls down could have been solved without further expense. The characters aren't developed in any way. I can't really explain this without adding spoilers, so i won't, but believe me, there is no recognition of ANY of the "new" assassins background or any story behind their assassination "style". Lazlo Soot (a returning character) isn't in any way as likable as in the original. His whole "human face mask" approach was very refreshing in the first film, but tired and used in this attempt. He adds very little in all. As for the Tremors? They just aren't the Tremors. Simple.

The action is average at best. Nothing special to report unfortunately. A lot of it just feels very rushed- cops get killed, one or two assassins get killed, more cops get killed. Unfortunately it all happens within 5 minutes, so there isn't even a chance for some of the assassins to even attempt getting to their target.

However, the story line does end out with a fairly OK twist, even if it is slightly far fetched. It gives reasoning behind the actions of the assassins and their "contracts". Not anything special though. So it's not all too bad i guess.

In a nutshell, I would recommend that you just go watch the first one again. There's a reason as to why this release is straight-to-video. This is only my opinion though, so by all means, give it a try. You might end up liking it more than i did :)

Because of all the negative response, I had to write this "WOW"

[schnabel1952 · 8/10 · 22 January 2010]

This is only my 2nd response to a movie and I have to say, I disagree with the negative response's. I did not go into this movie to compare it with the original even though I did watch and enjoyed it. Smokin' Aces 2 is everything I would have expected from a movie in this genre, It is fast paced, lots of action,killing,a little skin,and I thought a good plot. Yes, others have said that the plot was weak but, I thought it was good. I thought I had it figured out almost at the beginning but was pleasantly surprised at the end. This movie doesn't have twists all throughout the movie that keep you guessing but, the action makes up for that and you will be surprised in the end. It will probably leave you thinking about it, for awhile anyway. This movie is good fun with some great and humorous scenes. Probably a guys movie as I don't know too many women who are into this genre but I know at least a few who did love it. If you like movies that fall into this genre, you'll love this one. Don't believe the negative response, watch the movie and judge it on it's own merit and not on the original. I think you'll agree.........

Push thru beginning, it gets better

[tinabugvi · 6/10 · 3 June 2021]

Nowhere as good as the first one. It got better as it went on, If it wasn't for Clayne Crawford I would have given up in the first 10 minutes. The ending was good. Too bad it's so slow & low budget in the beginning, they probably lost a lot of people because of that.

A Heartless Trudge

[lovecraft231 · 2/10 · 13 January 2011]

In the world of straight to DVD movies, you have to really be careful. Sure, you'll sometimes run into something that wins you over, but more often than not that's not the case. The same can rarely be said for straight to DVD sequels of movies that played in theaters. While there have been exceptions (the sequels for "Undisputed" for example), what you normally get is a cynical cash grab and nothing more. So, does the sequel to "Smokin' Aces" fit into the cynical cash grab category? Answer: Yes. Yes it does.

Walter Weed (Tom Berenger) is a desk jockey without much going on in his life. That is, until the FBI finds out that there's a plot to assassinate him. Among them are sexy Ariella Martinez (Martha Higareda), who has a unique way of dispatching villains, the tough as nails Finbar McTeague (Vinnie Jones), and the Neo-Nazi family the Tremors. So, why are they after him? Or is all as it seems?

To be fair, "Smokin' Aces 2" does have a game cast whose up for anything. Sure, it's not the high profile case of the original, but it's the best the straight to DVD market can get. The problem though, is that many of them feel underused. Sure, Jones and Higareda do a good job, but we aren't given much time to learn anything about them other than they had a thing going on, and the plot twist nearing the end. Speaking of which, said twist is just terrible on so many levels. There were complaints about the twist in the original movie, but that was nothing compared to the head smacker we get here. Hell, they would have almost gotten away with it if there was something there to care about.

That's the films biggest problem. There's nothing there. I know, it's a direct to DVD sequel, but it doesn't do anything to justify it's existence. Hell, it's obvious because it tries so many attempts at being subversive and edgy, but it tries way to hard in that case. There's nothing I hate more than poor attempts at wackiness and edginess, and when that's all the movie has going for it, why should anybody care? The moment we got exploding circus clowns and a shootout set to the music of Evanescence, I just about gave up.

In the world of direct to DVD sequels, you can certainly do worse than this. That's no excuse for the movie though, which is nothing more than a heartless trudge of excess and pointlessness that offers very little to the table.

Oh boy...

[gaiderdraco · 1/10 · 16 January 2010]

I don't want to be rude by actually providing this film with a rating and seeing that I haven't a choice I give it no more than a 1.

Smokin' Aces was in interesting film. It has a good premise that, even though it isn't remarkable or original made sense for the universe that contained it. A mob snitch is going under witness protection and a large group of assassins are hired to exterminate him. He name is Buddy "Aces" Israel, hence the title "Smokin' Aces".

This film on the other hand ignores the fact that the first film even exists at all and therefore, immediately the title "Smokin' Aces 2" doesn't make sense. That's the first reason behind this film's epic failure. The next step in failing is that this was produced as a telefilm and was shot entirely with a digital camera. Not a very good either because with a digital format and not a enough lighting the final product is out of focus most of the time that the camera actually moves. That's just a technical aspect and during the last half an hour of the film it was out of focus during many parts and seemed to be shot with 30 frames per second (fps); the proper way to shoot any movie that contains an actual budget is with 24fps.

The story here is that an FBI veteran is under witness protection for reasons made unclear until the end of the film and seeing that the first film contained a plot twist that was kind of predictable, this film had to have one, also. The teleplay's awful so I predicted the ending's twist within the first 10 minutes. Once again, a group of assassins must kill a man and this time he's locked tightly underground and is very secured.

The first film provided audiences with a barrage of strange but intriguing characters for its assassins, but every one of them had a specific reason for wanting to collect the reward money. This film does not go that far. It's just assassins vs. the FBI and it's mostly boring.

The action is violent and hectic, when there is any and while the special effects are decent (lots of a bullet hits and blood packs) the CGI is atrociously awful. All explosions are transparent and physics doesn't exist in this film in any way, shape, or form.

To sum it up, even for a made for TV movie this movie sucks. It's pacing is, probably deliberately slow and its assassins are pathetic caricatures. The twist at the end can be seen a mile away and makes little to no sense and the performances are pretty bad. Again, even for a telefilm.

Skip this movie if you liked the first one and even if you didn't, or hadn't seen it skip it anyway. It's not even worth a free rental at your local Blockbuster Video.

D.

Absolutely revolting abomination of a movie

[imdb-178478 · 1/10 · 16 May 2010]

While I thoroughly enjoyed Smokin' Aces No. 1, this movie gave me brain cramps. I don't even no where to begin, since all parts of it were equally wrong.

I'm no quitter, I watched the movie in it's entirety, the whole uninspired story, the sickeningly corny dialogs, the cheapest-possible special effects, the mind-boggling "twist" ending and everything. I could literally feel my brain strangling itself with the spinal cord so the pain would end. I just now signed up at IMDb to warn you, for that taking one for the team wasn't completely in vain.

Let's review it in a more structured fashion:

First: The Plot. It has nothing to do with the events from Smoking Aces 1 and it's only very loosely related. We have several insane assassins competing for the kill, several FBI agents and a mark. There, the similarities end and the convolutions begin.

More than the entire first half of the movie is introduction of the assassins. And you get to sit through very long scenes of unreflected, extreme gore. In a flashback scene, one of the killers is driving several ice picks into the brains of a restrained but conscious man describing the process in every intricate detail. While the camera watches it without blinking. I enjoyed Rambo 4, but this made my stomach turn. It's unneeded and doesn't manage to transport any emotion, not even shock or hatred towards the killer. The rest of the idiocy is stereotypical White Trash Nazis that fornicate their siblings and The Black Widow, a Femme so incredibly Fatale, they had her kill a child molesting, Black Widow-seducing priest right before the altar. Then the FBI assembles to escort the mark to a not-so undisclosed, not-so safe location, but need to hand in their FBI badges and their brains first. Any climactic moment is either ignored (see: Brain Ice Picks) or ruined by one-liners coined by the directors three-year old nephew (see: Black Widow poison-kissing the priest)

Second half of the movie is watching brain-deprived FBI agents trying to secure the bunker below. They could've appointed Chief Wiggum from The Simpsons and he'd made less screamingly dumb things. FBI Special Agents AND professional assassins are shooters worse than Imperial Stormtroopers. They're shooting live midget clowns strapped with bombs into the bar above the bunker. Explosion CGI are worse than the special effects on Windows Minesweeper. Dumb FBI agents again, then corny one-liner, then another endless firefight among Imperial Stromtropper marksmen and then the forcefully contorted ending that will leave you feeling mentally molested for at least several hours.

The last seconds are the best of it: the main villain is simply shot like a dog. Two bullets put him and his shame of a movie down. No one-liner, no looking back.

By adding Jar Jar Binks and Wesley Crusher, this movie would have GAINED character likability.

Remember: what has been seen cannot be unseen. Friends don't let friends watch this.

Non-Stop Action & Larger than Life Characters = Great Movie

[duit_4 · 7/10 · 18 March 2010]

Caution: This review contains several spoilers. - I watched this movie twice on DVD and enjoyed it better the second time. I don't know about the fake explosions being too fakey - but the movie really rocks. - I liked the dialogue, the characters, the story line, the photography and everything. - The story begins with a real mystery over why there is a big contract out on this unassuming, do-nothing FBI clerical analyst - and that mystery continues to hover over the events that follow. What's not to like in this movie ? ( I am shouting emphatically now ! ) You have got the 'Hannibal Lector' guy, the 'two - face' guy, the self-exploding flying midgets, the jazz playing black guy - FBI agent that seems to be unkillable, the assassin with the kiss of death and the beautiful body and it goes on and on. I wish they had used the ending that they show in the deleted scenes it is more poetic than the ending that they actually went with. - Tom Berenger was an excellent choice for the leading role - an older man - few of words - but having a lot of hidden wisdom and experience - - and, finally, revealing the 'Joker' in the deck !