Mise à prix 2

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

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.

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!

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.

I never write reviews, but i signed up at IMDb just so i can write one for this movie. This movie is probably the worst that i have ever seen in my entire life. And I have seen a LOT of movies. I was hoping the movie would be like the first one in terms of direction and production, but i was mistaken. The director, producer, script writers and actors all performed second rate, and you can tell. The acting was horrible, the lines all sounded too rehearsed The script was confusing, the writers tried to pull it off as a sophisticated movie with twists and what not--but they failed. In all honesty the only reason i finished the movie was to see if it really was the worst movie i have ever seen. And it was. So don't waste your time with it.