The Boondock Saints was one of the most popular and successful cult films of the last two decades, so it came as no surprise that after many fans begged for a sequel, they finally made one which was released in 2009. I have to admit that I was pretty impressed with The Boondock Saints when it came out, although it wasn’t the strongest story I had ever seen in a film. To be honest, the film is more about the acting than the story, because the story leaves even the most rudimentary of enlightened people asking questions about its validity. The most glaring issue with the story is that it assumes an audience of people who understand at least a little bit about Catholicism and Christianity in general will accept the two vigilantes as heroes and not as villians. However, if killing is a sin then how can these killers possibly be heroes? I suppose that’s the beauty of using catholicism in a film, as visiting a priest can potentially absolve you of sin, meaning a character could get away with anything and still be seen as a hero. This probably says more about the public perception of the weaknesses of said religion than it does about the story.

Regardless, the reason I enjoyed The Boondock Saints was because of the incredibly enjoyable performances of Willem Dafoe, Sean Patrick Flannery, Norman Reedus, and David Della Rocco. They truly bring their characters to life, making you want to believe in their reality as a possibility, which draws you into the story no matter how ridiculous it is. That being said, the sequel is like the original without decent acting. The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day, aside from having possibly the stupidest title for a sequel ever, has some of the most mediocre acting ever as well. That doesn’t help things when the story is even more far fetched and ridiculous than its predecessor. Even though Willem Dafoe makes a cameo appearance in the film, he suddenly seems content to speak with a southern drawl, something he never had an issue with in the first film. The rest of the time we are faced with his replacement, an FBI agent played by Julie Benz who simply attempts to play the exact same role that Dafoe did in the previous movie with much less success.

Sadly, this isn’t the only time in the film that we see another actor filling in for a part that the former actor did a better job with. In the first film the saints had an unwanted partner in Rocco, so of course in this film they must replace him with a much less entertaining character in Romeo. Clifton Collins Jr. plays Romeo, attempting to be the comedy relief of the team and failing. In fact, even though Rocco isn’t officially in this movie, the few dream sequences he plays a part in are much more entertaining than anything we see Romeo do. Most of the actors who didn’t star in the original film felt uninspired and uninterested in the entire project. They made little to no attempt to immerse themselves in their roles, which of course doesn’t help the viewer to become interested in anything they are seeing. All in all, the acting in this film was its biggest weakness, which is in stark contrast to the first film in the series.

That being said, I still enjoyed the film somewhat. The story attempts to anchor itself onto the story of the first film, flimsily tying knots here and there to make it somehow relevant to the now overall mythos. While it’s obvious that they were trying to in some way recreate the magic of the first film, the fact that this wasn’t their only focus with the film actually works in its favor. They failed in recreating the magic, but they didn’t fail in tying the two stories together in a way that is somehow enjoyable. This probably weakens the series as a whole, but not so much as to leave me completely disinterested in it. Don’t get me wrong, the story is very weak and trivial, but Troy Duffy does his absolute best to make it work. The problem is that apparently his absolute best isn’t that great.

The special effects, like everything else in the film, try to replicate everything that was done in the original film. You know the bit, slow motion video of the saints shooting wildly at people and somehow hitting them. If anything draws you into the film, it’s the idea that if they weren’t divinely inspired they would never be able to do what they do, because they have no actual talent at what they do. Yes, the failures of the film combined with the plot of the film may very well end up randomly suspending your disbelief. This doesn’t make the film good, it just produces the possibility that the enjoyment of both this and the original Boondock Saints film may be reliant upon dumb luck. As such, watching it could possibly weaken your view of the first film in the series.

Final Synopsis: The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day has the potential to ruin the magic of the first film in the series. However, while it isn’t the greatest sequel ever made, it’s not the worst ever made either.

Points Lost: -1 for trying to recreate the magic of the original, -1 for Dafoe’s southern drawl, -1 for uninspired acting, -1 for weak story, -1 for the horrible sequel title

Lesson Learned: Killing is only a sin if you’re not Catholic.

Burning Question: Why did Willem Dafoe even agree to do this movie?

The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day

5/10

Tags: Bill Connolly, clifton collins jr., david della rocco, Latest DVD Reviews, latest movie reviews, norman reedus, peter fonda, Sean Patrick Flannery, troy duffy, willem dafoe