Van Wilder 2: The Rise of Taj

You know things aren't going well when the title character doesn't make an appearance in the 'sequel'. As much as I enjoyed Kal Penn in the first Van Wilder (and Harold and Kumar), he isn't given much to work with here.

The script is awful, just brutal. I think I laughed twice throughout the whole thing. I'm sure nobody is watching this type of movie for compelling characters and riveting plot, but when almost every single joke falls completely flat... every other blemish on the script becomes glaring. There are completely nonsensical subplots thrown about that reference secondary characters that you forgot were introduced in the first place, a silly competition that never makes any sense and an embarrassing turn by the bulldog that made his infamous scene from the first "Van Wilder" look like high art. If you sat a twelve year old in a room with a typewriter and told him to write "Revenge of the Nerds in England" he couldn't do much worse than what's given here. The worst part is that the movie gets consistently less funny as it goes on. The final 15 minutes or so is cringe inducing.

The direction isn't much better. The whole thing has a look of a made for cable TV movie you'd see on a kid's network. Not only is Kal Penn inconsistent with his accent from scene to scene, sometimes it's every other line. On a few occasions, I couldn't even make out the dialog. The actors clearly didn't give a clean read but it made through to the final cut anyways. I realize this was made on the cheap, but you can tell the folks behind the camera didn't put forth much effort. Either that or they didn't have the time. Regardless, it's not pretty to watch.

The only saving grace are the actors. Despite Kal Penn not bothering to hold his accent, everybody on screen appears to be having a good time. Even if everything else is awful, I can't hate a movie where it at least appears that the actors enjoyed their work. They all seemed determined to give their best despite what they all must have known was horrendous material. Kal and the female lead (Lauren Cohan) admirably build some chemistry with little help from their lines. Holly Davidson also steals a couple of scenes as the "cockney" member of the group.

While I didn't think this was a complete disaster, you'd be wise to avoid it.

Taj Mahal Badalandabad (played by Kal Penn) had a few funny moments in the movie (i.e. jokes regarding the former British aristocracy in India), but the movie almost nothing but sex jokes for the entire movie. This sort of humor included nearly a dozen different euphemisms for the female anatomy (I lost count), and countless jokes about how to "score" with the opposite gender. I laughed at the first few sex jokes, but by the end of the movie, I was really tired of hearing crude jokes.

If this sort of humor is appealing to you, then you'll enjoy this movie. Otherwise, don't bother seeing it. Overall, I felt "Harold and Kumar" was much more humorous. I'm a fan of Kal Penn's, but unfortunately, I cannot recommend this movie.

Brief Plot Synopsis (no spoilers below): Taj heads to Camford University (name taken from Cambridge and Oxford) in England to pursue his higher education and to follow in his fathers footsteps. He believes that he has been accepted to the prestigious fraternal guild "Fox and Hounds". However, upon arriving at the University, he is told by a "Fox and Hounds" member (nicknamed "Pip") that he was mistakenly sent this acceptance letter.

Taj is forced to become a teacher's assistant at the "Barn" residence, which contains a group of social outcasts. Pip and the other "Fox and Hounds" members treat Taj and his house mates very poorly. Determined to help the members of the Barn residence gain acceptance, Taj starts the "Cock and Bulls" fraternal guild. He hopes that the "Cock and Bulls" guild will win the Camford Cup, which is an annual academic, social, and athletic competition between fraternities. The bitterness between Taj and Pip only increases as the fraternities compete in several competitions to earn points towards the Camford Cup.

I cannot say anything more about the plot, or else I'll spoil it for you.

"Van Wilder 2 attempts to capture the spirit of its predecessor, "Van Wilder: Party Liaison," but falls short in terms of humor and originality. The movie follows Taj, played by Kal Penn, who was a popular character in the first film and now takes the lead.

While Kal Penn does his best to bring charm and wit to the role, the film lacks the charisma and comedic timing of Ryan Reynolds from the original. The storyline is formulaic, following the classic college comedy tropes without adding much innovation.

One of the film's redeeming qualities is its supporting cast, featuring talented actors like Anthony Cozens and Daniel Percival, who manage to inject some humor into otherwise predictable scenes. Additionally, the picturesque setting of the British university campus provides an interesting backdrop.

However, the film relies heavily on crude humor and stereotypical jokes, often resorting to clichés and tired gags. The humor feels forced and rarely hits the mark, making it difficult to sustain interest throughout the movie.

In comparison to the first "Van Wilder" film, "The Rise of Taj" lacks the charm and memorable moments that made its predecessor a cult classic. While it may provide some mild entertainment for fans of college comedies, it ultimately falls short in delivering a truly enjoyable and memorable cinematic experience.

In summary, "Van Wilder 2: The Rise of Taj" tries to capture the essence of the original film but fails to replicate its comedic success. It's a forgettable sequel that relies too heavily on tired humor and lacks the originality and charm of the first installment. While it may offer a few laughs, it ultimately falls flat in its attempt to recapture the magic of the original "Van Wilder" movie.

It's no Ryan Reynolds of course, but it's just a teen fun movie. People are reviewing this like it's supposed to be something other than that. I didn't laugh out loud, but for me watching a comedy isn't always about rolling in the floor laughing. It's just feel good.

First off I must say I loved VW one, it is still one of my favorite movies. It was very funny, entertaining and Ryan Reynolds was just perfect. The acting was great and the Van Wilder character was unique but familiar.

Now that starts me off on the first problem with "VW2:Rise of Taj" and that problem is that Taj just does not bode well as a primary character. And as much as I like Kal Penn he looked uncomfortable trying to maintain "Taj" and not become "Kumar" and not become "Van Wilder" himself. He seemed conflicted with this issue the entire film. Even his accent would stray in and out, at times sounding totally SoCal American.

The plot itself was predictable from the second it started unfolding. You pretty much knew the gist of what was going to happen for the next 90 minutes based on the initial meeting of Taj and Pip (the antagonist) but really we don't watch these types of movies for their plot-twisting and high caliber story. We watch them because they are fun. Or in this case because we hope it is funny.

That brings up the next problem with VW2. It was not all that much fun, especially not compared to VW1. And it was not all that funny. The first hour was pretty boring and choppy, and seemed comfused about where it wanted to go, even though we knew where it was going. It never really seems to be leading anywhere but in circles. But the problem is that while it is leading in circles, the jokes trying to hold it together are not very funny. They had so many chances to go in interesting directions but never did. They seemed to force it all together too quickly, as the movie oddly moves too slowly.

I actually really liked some of the supporting case.... I really liked Lauren Cohen a lot. She was understated and strong at the same time, while doing her best to work within the limits of the script. The goofy cast of misfits turned cool are good, but are really underused by the writers and directors. One of the things that made VW1 so great was the use of secondary players and there was much more unexplored potential there.

But then something happened towards the end of the film. You unexpectedly start to pull for the underdogs to win and you don't have to wait too long for that to happen. Everything buttons up at the end in a more entertaining way then you expect after the first half. A few decent gags work their way into the fold and you have no choice but to smile a little.

You walk away feeling satisfied that the bad guy got what he deserved and all the good guys win. Which if the movie is that bad you generally don't care about at all. And that got me thinking that the movie overall was not as bad as it seemed.

Yes VW2 is a pretty bad movie, but so are a lot of movies. It is not that bad if you don't compare it to VW1. If you go in expecting to see the original feeling that VW1 had you will be disappointed a lot..... if you take VW2 by itself, it is a silly movie that is not all that funny, but still has some redeeming qualities, and a few funny moments. I gave it a 5-of-10 as I would compare it to most middle of the road college comedy movies.

Just don't go in expecting to see Van Wilder. This movie would have done better to drop the "Van Wilder 2" title altogether. It really is not VW2, it is a small secondary character in another movie with very few ties to the original. It would have been better to just toss in the VW association like they did and leave it off the title. I'm pretty sure Lampoon fans would have made the connection without VW being in the title. compare it to VW1 or it will pale in comparison....