One Shot 2

ONE MORE SHOT is a weaker and cheaper sequel to the first movie that never quite manages to reach the highs of its predecessor. The problem with this one is that it's obviously much cheaper and thus the action, although plentiful, is far sloppier than what we've seen in the original. Adkins still proves himself in the action stakes as you'd expect, but the bland, JOHN WICK style shoot-outs just don't have the same oomph as we saw before. The most interesting thing about this one is that it was shot entirely in and around Stansted Airport, which allows for a good use of space and setting. Michael Jai White is criminally wasted as the bad guy.

I've seen bad acting in action flicks, in fact I expect it, but this movie takes the cake. The award for worst actor goes to Alexis Knapp. She sounds like Meg from Family Guy, not credible for a villain, over the top acting on scenes that don't require it, and too robotic on scenes that require more emotion. Scott Adkins is his usual bad, but you watch his movies to see his kicks and aerial moves, not to nominate him for an acting award. On that note, don't expect to see anything spectacular. Instead, they replaced the kung fu with "gun fu" closer to a John Wick movie. Understandable since Adkins is getting up there in years. You can't expect to see him doing the same stunts forever. Finally, I wish Michael Jai White and Tom Betenguer had more onscreen time. They are way underutilized.

First off, I liked this sequel more than One Shot. I liked the setting in an American airport more than a military base in Poland. I liked that he fought the same (really good) opponent three times and his fight against Michael Jai White wasn't as good as Undisputed 2 or Accident Man, but was one of the best parts of the movies. Just like the first movie, takes that long have to be impressive even if you don't like it. The movie may not have ended on a cliffhanger, but it left room to imagine that there is the potential for another sequel. Overall, this isn't one of Scott Adkins better movies but it was more entertaining than some of his worst.

One More Shot is directed by James Nunn and stars Scott Adkins, Michael Jai White, Alexis Knapp and Tom Berenger.

Scott Adkins is back with an American accent for a sequel to his 2021 movie One Shot. Taking place directly after the events of the first film Navy SEAL Jake Harris (Adkins) is ordered to escort terrorist suspect Armin Mansur to Washington D. C for interrogation.

I think Writer/Director James Nunn should be applauded for pulling off something so ambitious without it ever feeling gimmicky (the use of vertical space is impressive), especially on what must be a small budget, but the film never quite makes a case for it being one fake take beyond "Hey! That sounds cool." (which, if it gets the project funded, is good enough, I guess!). These One Shot movies to me are somewhat comparable to Chris Hemsworth's Extraction movies on Netflix and that's definitely a compliment considering those movies have a Netflix budget behind them.

The story here is also way more ambitious than the 2021 original, but a pace killing torture scene and an anti climactic ending hold this back. There's also not enough Michael Jai White here. All his scenes come across like they were shot in a day and he only shares one scene with Adkins at the very end. Also as much as these movies look and feel like video games I'm pretty sure the intention also isn't to have your lead character come off like he's ripped out of a video game as well. It would be nice to give Adkins some type of emotional depth to work with in the inevitable third movie just to make the character feel more human.

Either way, sign me up for ONE LAST SHOT or whatever the next one is.

What made 2021 "One Shot" stand out was its concept. To my knowledge very few movies actually done this. Sometimes you get long amazing sequences but not a whole movie. So i think that concept kinda carried the first movie.

So obviously this movie follow the same pattern and pick up very close to where the first one ended. But altough you can clearly apreciate the effort and the filmaking behind everything just as the first, its not as new anymore.

That said once again the team behind the cameras really made it work. The cuts are well hidden. Maybe a filmaker would notice them but me, an average movie fan, watching this with a few beers, i couldn't. So on that side the movie does work great.

But behind the concept itself, you have a very average plot. Pretty much "Die Hard in ...add location" as so many movies have done before. One lone soldier picking terrorists one by one to achieve a goal. That said its perfectly servicable.

Now where i am thorn is in the concept of the movie versus the action itself. The action looks great on a point of view of thinking it was done surely with minimal takes and having to coordinate all of this. We all seen Jackie Chan bloopers and how many takes he usually needed to nail his crazy stunts. So when i compare what they done here and HOW they done it, i think its pretty good. BUT... If you compare the fight scenes to other Scott Adkins movies, its nowhere on the same level.

When it comes to gun fights, again its very decent but maybe its due to the fact most guns had silencers attached to them, the sound effects felt a bit off to me. Obviously comparing them to John Wick or Extraction would be unfair, due to the nature of the movie, but i feel some scenes worked great while others felt a bit flat.

I was pretty exited to see Michael Jai White in this movie. I had no idea who he was gonna play as i didn't watch any trailer. Sadly his screen time is VERY minimal and compare to their previous work together (Scott and Michael), its their less exiting collaboration for me when it comes to them interacting.

Now the big 2 questions. Did i had fun and do i want "Another Shot" (my homemade title for a triquel). Answer is yes and "yeah but...".

I would rather have Scott do another Accident Man or especially another Boyka way before another sequel to this franchise. And quite honestly i feel by a third movie the novelty concept will have fade off even more. Sadly its kinda the whole point of this franchise so if they don't do it the same way, then why do it at all?

Bottom line, if they make a third one, i will surely watch it, but i won't be insanely exited for it. As a Scott Adkins fan i try to watch pretty much everything he star in anyway. Im gonna give the movie a 7 out of 10 on IMDB (3.5 Stars on Letterboxd) because it did entertain me and i can surely apreciate the effort put behind it.