daddysarm

Positive development vs #1 is the screen time of Jon Bernthal. He is usually good, and I dare say, he is the best thing in this film. He and Affleck had sort-of believable chemistry, and he amped up the humor from Accountant #1.

As for the 2, maybe 3 steps back, the plot is a MESS. It is all over the place. There are too many sub-plots. Most of them never really matter or get resolved, other than having many people die. I could write an entire review just listing the but-what-about things that were left dangling. The main villain and his hitman and their launderer all just blend together as "The Bad Guy". You won't really care.

Also, Affleck came up with new tics, speech pattern, etc for his character. I saw Accountant #1 less than a year ago. Watching #2, I kept asking myself "Is that really Affleck or did they get some look-alike to play the part?" It was different and not better, though maybe part of why I enjoyed it less was the horrible plot (and pacing).

Third, other than the brothers, none, and I mean none, of the characters were interesting or at all developed. Medina, Anais, all the bad guys: BORING. And the kids at the Neuroscience Academy: BORING.

Oh, a fourth, given all of the above, the film is far too long. They could easily cut 20 minutes and say "Less is More".

Watch for the cinematography, and the acting. THey did a great job with the casting. I will say I have no idea who Logan Lehrman is and probably won't recognize him in another movie. He was the weak link. Other than cinematography and acting; however, problems make it in no way worth a 2nd viewing. It is ultra-violent, really just a bunch of "killing people in war, cuz that is what it is". Also, quite a bit of the dialogue is foolish, esp the Bible stuff. The biggest problem is everything about "the crossroads", ie the long ludicrous ending.

A couple of the tactical moves by the Americans seemed foolish, but I never was and never wanted to be an Army officer, so hey, maybe they got it right.

Some of the slight humor works, but otherwise, this episode demolishes belief. It is hard to believe how terribly tedious the first 14 minutes are. Everything is telegraphed early. Then there are meaningless characters saying meaningless things. Then truly one of the most bizarre scenes I have ever seen. A couple come back to visit, open the front door of the house, discuss whether anyone is home and whether they should shout, bang on doors or what. They decide to just leave and try again in a few hours. That was it. That happened. It was completely meaningless, yet, it was stretched out for ... no idea why.

I won't even bother pointing out that the wife wasn't all that bad, because the "experts" will claim that is the point ... that in Hitchcock anyone (the husband) can be evil for no reason at all (just too timid to tell his wife to shut up and stop trying to control him). Big yawn.

And then, when he gets to the USA, there are goofy shots of NYC followed by goofy shots of LA. What happened? Was everyone sick that week? Was there a multi-day blackout in LA so they had to just whip something up at the last minute? The story is not even original. It had been done on another series. Very curious, and not in any good way.