The filmmakers decided, after many years, to shake, so to speak, the old and remember the past. This is not an exploitation of a famous film. It is more about self-assertion. It is an attempt to express itself on another level.
Years have passed and Eddie Murphy decides to show what the first film could look like now, when Eddie is already known and famous ... but not particularly popular.
The second part of the Trip to America turned out to be exactly what it is usual to try to look twenty in sixty years. Basically, those who witness this, there remains a strange feeling of some dilapidatedness and whether neglect, irritation, or something else elusive.
Murphy invited many actors from the first part to the film, but if they shone then you can count solely on nostalgic romanticism. What Eddie misses is that too much time has passed since the release of the first film, and most likely, viewers of the first part no longer have any romantic illusions. Although, the film is clearly black and is designed, to a greater extent, for the American black audience. To some extent, this is a film for their own.
Maybe they see the film differently. It's what they call our noses. You can look at it like that.
But back to the movie. Returned to the film, the heroes of the first part have already lost a bit over the years and look stale. Age in itself is not an obstacle. The question is in the form of representation of this age. There must be some depth and meaning with age. But this is a big problem in Coming to America 2.
There seems to be a standard way of refreshing the material - inviting young and energetic assistants to age stars as a "motor". But in this film, these youngest ones are kind of gray and plain. Whether they were recruited by quotas, or not tasted by those who were engaged in casting. And maybe, again, for the target audience, such actors are a good choice.
Not without modern fashionable feminist values in the West. Where else? Although in some scenes over these very trends, the characters of the film are quite caustic jokes.
What else did the filmmakers want to record their success? Scale and external, ostentatious gloss. This film is reminiscent of Indian cinema. Costumes, dances, the number of people involved in extras. But, looking at all these expensive and seemingly spectacular scenes, the question arises: why all this?
And then again, we have to make a reservation: for whom was all this filmed? It is possible that the target audience does not ask such questions, but is simply content with quantity and color richness. It's expensive.
The special scene with King Jaffa Joffer (without details) is perplexing with a taste of horror. What was that?
The bright spot of the film is the hero of Wesley Snipes. Definitely, a talented and charismatic actor shines in this film. It is a pity only broken, to some extent, the career of this actor because of problems with the US tax system.
The costumes should also be noted. They're beautiful and colorful. You can see that the costumers worked on the film seriously. In the style of clothing, you can guess some African motifs and color solutions, but it is impossible to say more about this without being an expert in this matter.
A little sad that the film did not cause any special emotions, did not stir some forgotten strings inside. It seemed too detached from the first part, the authors failed to build any bridges between the two parts. The film is perceived as a separate product, only resembling the first part or trying to be like it.
“If you find what you were looking for, the distance doesn’t matter.” ?
In 1982, we can say that there was an epochal event. At the suggestion of his girlfriend, director Walter Hill invited to his new film '48 hours' paired with Nick Nolty 21-year-old stand-up comedian and actor of the show 'Saturday Night Live' Eddie Murphy. The film made an unexpected furor, collected an excellent box office at that time, was included in the competition for several prestigious film awards. But many said that the debut Murphy outplayed the highly experienced and authoritative Nolty. The next year after '48 hours', a new comedy featuring Eddie is released on screens - 'Switch places' And again, success with viewers and critics, a solid box office, nominations and awards. It became obvious to everyone: a new comedy star has risen in the cinematic sky. And the company 'Paramount Pictures' concludes with Murphy a long-term contract for five projects (he was subsequently renewed more than once). But after a couple of decades, Murphy was followed by a trail of scandals, and the films ceased to be liked by the public, which led to the end of the contract, and the actor himself went off the radar for several years.
But while Eddie Murphy was still on horseback in 1988, another comedy with his participation ' A Trip to America' was released on the screens. The story of a good-natured Prince Zamunda named Akim, who did not agree to marry at the choice of his royal parents and decided to find a bride for love, came to New York and pretended to be an ordinary guy, the audience liked it very much, even in our country ' Trip to America' earned the status of a classic of the genre. But, as already mentioned, after a tumultuous start to his acting career, Murphy began a period of stagnation. And yet Eddie periodically tried to reboot his career and regain the love of the audience and the respect of critics, when he starred in the projects ' Mr. Church' (2015) and ' My name is Dolemite' (2019). And I have to say that most people have noted Murphy's decent performance in these films. But back in 2017, it was announced that work was underway to create a sequel 'Travel to the Americas'. This news was received skeptically, because the attitude towards the continuation of successful films was not very good, but still Murphy and ' Paramount Pictures' resumed their collaboration.
And in 2021, the honest public was given the second part of the classic comedy from the romantic 80s of the last century. Nostalgically, the sequel is perceived as if hurrah. Murphy and the studio signed many of the actors from the original film. So it was a pleasure to watch the return as a friend and servant of Prince Akim comedian and TV presenter Arsenio Hall. The magnificent James Earl Jones as King and John Amos as Akim's father-in-law are here too. The beloved American wife of the prince, played by Sharie Hidley, returned to this image. In general, the old-fashioned company from the 1988 film gathered almost in full force. And according to the script of the second 'Trips to America' the throne of Zamunda after Akim should be occupied only by a male representative, so Jermaine Fowler joined the cast as Akim's son Lavelle, as well as Leslie Jones as Lavelle's mother and Tracy Morgan, who played Fowler's uncle. In addition, there is Wesley Snipes, who starred with Murphy in his previous film ' My name is Dolemite'.
But it is the image of Snipes - the king of the neighboring Zamunda country, who tries to marry his son to the daughter of Akim, threatening the possibility of a military invasion, remembering how Prince Akim treated his sister, forcing her to jump on one leg and bark - turned out to be the most strange and caricatured. And his choreographic appearances, as if it were a tribute to Eddie Murphy's friend Michael Jackson, looked tasteless and ridiculous. Admittedly, something happened with Shari Hidley, who looked so cute in the first & #39;Coming to America', but in the sequel was static, dry and emotionless. Not bad, however, was in the frame Jermaine Fowler, but even against the background of too serious Prince Akim, he did not get to the level of Murphy. By the way, it is true that Murphy in 'Travel to America 2' has changed the image in comparison with the previous film, because somewhere escaped his good-naturedness, naivety, purposefulness. But perhaps the image of Prince Akim required a new approach after so many years. But Arsenio Hall has not changed at all, and his Semmy, as an adventurer, remained so.
Based on the above, it turns out that 'Travel to America 2' causes nostalgia, and a smile appears most often when you see the heroes of your childhood on the screen. Even the grumpy and ever-arguing old men in the barbershop evoked that most nostalgic smile. So did Vanessa Bell Calloway as the princess who, after Akim’s words, continued to jump on one leg and bark. Not bad broke in with the comedy role of Leslie Jones, received the award channel 'MTV'. But there are certain problems with the part of the scenario where innovations were introduced. Even the plot gluing, where Prince Akim learns that he has a son in America, turns out to be so weak that the filmmakers seem to casually mention it and do not emphasize it more. In general, the sequel 'Travel to America' there are both good and bad sides, but, in general, I personally expected the worst, but until the first 'Travel...' the second part is very far in many ways.
6 out of 10
P.S. And Eddie Murphy seems to have the spirit of Michael Bay’s studio, which specializes in creating all sorts of sequels, triquels, remakes and spin-offs, because the comedian announced that after the end of filming ' Coming to America 2' he will closely engage in the production of the fourth part ' Cop from Beverly Hills' - another classic film that made Eddie Murphy a star of the highest category.
If you love the original movie, never watch the second one. The only thing that prevented me from putting a unit on this creation was the presence of many actors from the first film. It was interesting to see how they changed. The meaning and value of the second part dried up. The original was a good tale of love. He had a moral. He taught us not to judge people by first impressions and to listen to our hearts. The first film with respect and kind, albeit slightly mocking, smile showed us a peculiar culture of the country of Akim. The second openly laughs at it, makes both the main characters and antagonists idiots, turning the story into a vulgar parody. The same faces, but... Zamunda's not the same. It hurts a lot.
It's a shame. Cinema at the level ' masterpieces ', falling on reviews to BadComedian.
The first part of 1988 can be called the golden fund of cinema. She conquered the audience then, and after 30 years, the viewer still touches the romantic love story of the prince and a simple girl from Queens. The prince was the standard of a real man. Intelligent, educated, not greedy, sincere, hardworking, decent, brave... His dream was clear - he did not want to live a life with a servant in the form of a wife. And he decided to find a decent girl who would not be with him for money, but for his nature. I really wanted to test myself. To live independently, without money, servants, special treatment. The message of the film was clear.
The second part does not spoil the viewer with positive characters. It doesn’t reveal any heroes at all. We see some echoes of old acquaintances: Prince Akim, his friend Sammy, King Jaffe Joffer, Princess Lisa, her father Cleo McDowell, some other faces. There's almost no telling about them. The important thing to know is that there is no heir. And women don't belong on the throne. Thus, stirring up the feminist community, the heroes went to look for a man heir. But... that the women, that the men in the film are neither fish nor meat.
There's nothing interesting about the sequel. No zest. The jokes are flat and vulgar. The plot is stupid.
Eddie Murphy’s career initially could not stand still, as he was actually immediately after his first ascent to the comedy scene was known as one of the best performers of the ironic conversational genre. Speaking to a large audience, Murphy without a shadow of embarrassment ridiculed everyone who came across him and did this so sharply and whiplashly that he was forgiven even the most daring antics. Murphy saw absolutely no problem in making jokes about racial and gender discrimination. He famously ridiculed old age, youth, poverty and wealth, and although his comedic style was not liked by everyone, there were still more fans of his talent, thanks to which Murphy managed to become one of the main celebrities of the show & #39; Saturday Night Live' Soon after his television debut, Eddie Murphy began to receive very interesting offers from Hollywood producers who wanted to get a fearless comedian, whose audience was not at all averse to seeing his idol on the big screen. '48 hours', ' They were switched places', ' The Beverly Hills Policeman' and also ' Golden Child' followed at the box office one after another, bringing the studio serious money and thereby strengthening Murphy’s already brilliant reputation as a person who absolutely attracts attention. And under the very curtain of the 80s, the comedian managed to once again prove his attractiveness to the widest audience, agreeing to shoot in the film John Landis & #39; A Trip to America' which became one of the actor's business cards for the rest of his life.
The story, which told the world about the prince of a fictional African country, who was forced to go to the United States in search of true love, at first failed to seduce critics who considered it too simple and not the most expressive in the career of Eddie Murphy. Nevertheless, ordinary viewers were able to appreciate it and subsequently 'A trip to America' became an unshakable classic, which is enjoyed by many generations of viewers. And here it is also worth noting that the film of John Landis became one of the last really successful works of Murphy in the big cinema, while after her in the career of the comedian there was an extremely unstable streak, in which really excellent works like ' Bowfinger' alternated with ambiguous ' Pluto Nash' and other controversial films. When the number of frankly weak comedies with the participation of Eddie Murphy reached its peak, he decided to almost completely stop shooting, took a long pause and decided what to do next, because in this vein further to entertain the audience was simply impossible. And when the actor was approached by the producers, who wanted to resurrect the very “Journey to America” & #39; he thought that this would be a great chance to remind himself again and even regain his long-lost positions.
The film is set 30 years after Prince Akeem (Murphy) flew to America and brought home his true lover Lisa (Sharie Hidley). During the years spent in marriage, the prince and his wife gave birth to charming daughters who have already become enviable brides, but this circumstance did not solve the problems of the Zamund state, and one can even say that it aggravated. The fact is that according to the laws of Zamunda, the throne should be inherited exclusively by a prince, not a princess. And this is well known by the head of the neighboring state, the belligerent General Izzy (Wesley Snipes), who gives the Akim an ultimatum. If his daughter doesn't marry son Izzy, then it's gonna be a big war. Naturally, Akim is not going to allow this and is forced to resort to the only option that he has left, in order to exclude the forced relationship with Izzy. So the salvation for Zamunda can be the illegitimate offspring of Akim, who lived all his life in the United States, and did not suspect anything about his father. Of course, Akim, along with his good friend Sammy (Arsenio Hall) must again go to America to save his homeland from encroachments and announce the appearance of the true heir to the throne.
Nostalgic mood, which periodically overcome the audience, became the reason for the birth of a lot of remakes and sequels of the good old classics, and to understand the logic of the producers & #39; Trips to America 2' it was easy. They wanted to give the audience an absolutely incredible revival of the beloved story, and even with the participation of the full cast of the original film. Of course, this idea in itself is quite good, but its implementation is frankly unexpressive. Trying not to offend anyone and at the same time absolutely everyone will like, the film of Craig Brewer, who replaced John Landis, looks at all not sharp and not as provocative as the first part. The number of sparkling jokes is minimized here, while the monotonous humor about sex, as well as the extremely frequent repetition of cult comedy adventures from the original film, leave not the most pleasant aftertaste. Of course, you can understand the logic of the producers, who in turbulent social times were afraid to offend even the smallest part of their audience, but here we must understand that 'Coming to America' liked the audience just because of the signature style of Eddie Murphy, who was never afraid of anything and made his name openly intolerant, but still such appropriate jokes. But it didn’t matter to the people from high offices, who were able to convince Murphy himself to star in the tape, but then built on the set so harsh conditions that it a priori could not get anything memorable. However, Eddie Murphy himself, enrolled in the ranks of the key authors of the picture, should have initially understood everything himself, but, apparently, his creative sight again failed and he could not consider all the traps of participating in this sequel in time.
It should also be noted that most of the screen action 'Travels to America 2' took place in the royal palace of Zamunda and its surroundings. At the same time, Akim’s journey across the ocean was shown in a sharply reduced version, and it cannot be said that the authors showed some ingenuity and showed something new and unexpected. The main storyline revolves around the hustle and bustle of the palace and it is serious fatigue, because despite the participation of great actors, they failed to kindle the flames of history with their catchy dialogues and really funny jokes, the place of which was taken by systematic self-repeats and not the most successful attempts by the author to joke on the topic of feminism, universal equality and conflict of generations. Eddie Murphy, despite his age and critical mistakes in the film, continues to radiate energy and great enthusiasm. He, as well as his eminent colleagues, with one appearance in the frame, were able to please the audience, and let the sequel not become an object of admiration, but he was able to unite in one place many interesting performers who were just pleasant to see.
5 out of 10
I was setting myself up for a complete failure, because there was almost no good talk about the film. When I started watching, I realized it was almost the same, only these days. The energy of the 21st century is a bit repulsive, but basically the same atmosphere of the African state, the same beautiful dances, the same Queens with its original moments.
What I really liked was the preservation of most of the cast. It's just been a little over 30 years, which is a decent time. The actors got old, but also quickly got used to the role, showing their characters again. Cool! Here you and Eddie Murphy, who has already become king of Zamunda, and John Amos, and Arsenio Hall, and Sharie Hidley, and James Earl Jones, and Leslie Jones. It’s great to see your beloved children again. And Germaine Fowler and Wesley Snipes, who joined them, added a pair of convincingly suitable characters to the picture.
The story is a little different from the 80s. There was also a reason to fly to the states, but mostly from the first part of the action still took place in Zamund, thereby diversifying the picture. The picture was replenished with gadgets and other newfangled bumbass, but it looked good, though humor ' below the belt' somewhat slipped, but not critical. In my opinion, this is a very successful continuation of the original. Why so much criticism? Is it not clear that success will not be repeated? Do you want to see your favorite characters in a new business? True, sometimes it is better not to decide on such a sequel, in order to keep in mind only the good about the film, but here I think coped well.
The story of the sequel turned out to be somewhat primitive than the original, but I will not call it sucked out of a finger. A good line of love, friendship, memories. By the way, quite a lot of inserts from the original tape, so nostalgia can not be avoided when watching. One can complain that the character of Germain Fowler is not fully disclosed, as it was easy for him to go through everything, the entire adaptation to Zamunda and his position.
I'm happy. For my soul, the film was a success. It looks easy, still a lot of royal beauty is shown, did not forget to mention that funny hairdresser from Queens (I do not leave the feeling that it was made a film Hairdresser). Also, I could not help but notice a cameo associated with the film Switch places, where Eddie Murphy also played. The story of the prince, now King Akim, impressed me again.
But I’m afraid that the sequel is already painful. I do not understand what the audience expected, I expected less, but received more. A beautiful and vivid tale, a story of love and memories. Oh, 80s!
In 2021, another mercantile express in the past went from Paramount station and arrived on the air of Amazon. This time to nostalgize the viewer invites Eddie Murphy, snow-white smiling on the poster of the sequel to the cult comedy 80x & #39; Trip to America'.
The plot of the picture takes the viewer to the already familiar African Zamunda. Prince Akim happily passes his days as an exemplary family man and father of three daughters. However, news of Akim’s growing out-of-wedlock son in the United States and the neighboring state’s harassing royal family force Akim to take active and decisive action.
In our harsh times, no one expected a decent sequel. And not even because sequels, as a whole, are dominated by some curse, but because to shoot a decent movie today is an action absolutely unnecessary and unprofitable to anyone. It is much easier to shoot something in a short time against the background of the same laxhery scenery of the mansion of a familiar rapper for 60 million and push a streaming service for 125 million. In such mathematics, quality is only an abstract variable. Everyone wins, except the audience. And the audience was honored to watch a banal plot on the basis of the original copypaste, with primitive humor, terrible acting and a tolerant agenda, from which racist and sexist humor looks absolutely without problems. I wonder if Eddie Murphy, who had to be persuaded to take one white character to the original film, is embarrassed by the fact that the entire creative team, including the producer, is white. Double standards? No problem, because money has no race or gender. The only bright spot of this costumed parody on Wakanda is Wesley Snipes, who perfectly reveals his comedic potential. Nothing personal, just business.
I was expecting a one-off sequel that could be watched one evening under a pack of chips. And he was right. The film is a little more complicated than the previous one and a little better.
It's great to see Eddie Murphy on the big screen again. Immediately remember that stand-up 1987, the first film, and of course his unforgettable voice in animated films about the green giant. For all of us, it is almost a symbol of the era. It looks amazing for his almost 60 years. And the other actors in the film are also very, very pleasing to the eye. Almost knocked out of me a nostalgic tear.
The second film is more complicated than the first. In the first film, there was one storyline - the story of growing up, the story of a guy who wants to make his own way in life, and not follow the path prepared by his parents. And the flip side of it is the story of parents who also have something to learn from their children. In the second part of the storylines at once several - and familiar to us the story about a guy who wants to find his way in life, and the story of the difference between generations, and the story of how one person is difficult to sit on three chairs, the story that times have changed greatly since the distant 1988 and, finally, the story of how you can get out of your way in life. Personally, of all these stories, I was touched by the last one, the story of Akim. This is the story of how a once young and ambitious man under the pressure of circumstances gave up his soul, his path, and became a conformist. This film is a good reminder to all of us. It’s like asking the viewer: 'Hey, where are you 18 years old? Do you really see your restraint and tradition as growing up? Or did you really just get scared and give the back and now cover up your fear of going your own way with traditions and rules?' This is a story about how you can not forget who you are as you once were, and if suddenly you find yourself long ago turned wrong, you can always count on people close to you who will remind you of who you really are and lead you out of the dark corridors of life.
As for the actors, everything is a bit boring. Honestly, I expected Eddie Murphy to be more agitated, but the guy's almost 60, so I can forgive him. The rest of the actors, with some exceptions, I have not seen anywhere else (except the first part), so there is nothing to compare with.
A good idea component, some ' paternal advice' and nostalgia for the times of the first film.
I will not repeat what I have said in previous reviews. I'd rather say good. The most positive and vivid impression was made by the costumes. In fact, this film is an African 5th element. Fabrics, paints, texture, ingenuity of jewelers and masters of accessories are simply beyond praise. Five plus or more. Interiors in Africa are a solid four. Computer animals are good, too. I am glad that after 30 years, the actors from the previous caste are generally alive and well.
And everything else is bad. The plot is absolutely predictable, boring, flat, monotonous and drawn out. The acting wasn't happy either. A positive impression remained only from the daughters of King Akim. Edie Murphy, unfortunately, has aged, goes there here and tries to work with 3 facial expressions. Snipes, to my taste, is too eccentric and resembles the unfinished Tucker of the 5th element. The love line of the heir and son of King Akim is as standard as possible, and his beloved also illustrates herself both externally (well, here for the taste and color), and in terms of the game thesis ' love of evil'. Gorgeous (in other projects) Tracy Morgan doesn't seem to understand what he's doing here. This is probably the first movie where his jokes never made me laugh. Speaking of jokes. There are a couple of fleeting funny moments. The rest are the most banal and clumsy written and played gags, which could be attributed to the general plot line (sudden news for a simple cocky boy that he is a prince, unbred and rude, but kind and simple guys from Queens encounter manners and traditions at court, exotic African customs, etc., etc.).
Whether to look ... a difficult question. At home in good quality and on a good TV background for something - quite. It will be a long and difficult movie.
And in the end, I want to once again admire the first film 'Journey to America'. Very bright, light, funny and rich film. Was. Perhaps in modern times, this is impossible to remove in principle. Sorry.
'This is how we try to swim forward, fighting the current, and it tears down everything and knocks our boats back into the past. ' - Francis Fitzgerald
After more than thirty years, they decide to release a continuation of the cult story. At one time very successful, but most importantly - self-sufficient, not requiring continuation. It was possible to develop history in the far nineties, but they did not do this, because they considered that everything had already been said, and the main message about the importance of family and the conscious choice of the second half was heard. Times change, morals change. But the thing is, the world doesn't like to be digging into its past. The past must remain in the past, for that is where it is truly beautiful. The ratings speak for themselves. Only the hell naive viewer could expect from this film adaptation of something more, but the main task of the film copes with – it meets the expectations of the majority. 'A Trip to America 2' is a gray sequel created to make money on nostalgia.
Thus, the audience once again witnesses the attempt of major film studios to enter the same river twice. I was not born yet, and people were already quoting phrases of the characters, laughing at topical, really funny jokes, backed by emotional emphasis and good acting. The first film became a success thanks to the original plot and rising star Eddy Murphy, who at that time everyone recognized the role of a police officer from Beverly Hills. 'Home Alone', for example, got its continuation when it should have. In this case, the main issue is not the quality of the continuation, but its need. I understand that the desire to remake the classic will always be. It is also clear that clinging to something good in the past, it is difficult to let go and move on.
First, the film should be called 'A Trip to Africa', because it is in Zamund that 80% of the action takes place, not in Queens, as it was in the first part. Second, the authors duplicate the original ideas, telling essentially the same story, embellished with modern feminization trends. I must admit that they do it very carefully, so everything looks quite harmonious. I want to believe that this movie is just a loud door bang and we will not see the third part. As much as we like, we will not go back to the 90s. We will gladly return to them in the case of some new film adaptation, telling the truth of life, conveying the atmosphere of that time, but we are not 10 years old - Zamunda remained in a beautiful, charming past. We have to move on, my friends.
The best way to describe Coming to America 2 is to say it’s not all that bad. Indeed, quite weak praise, but it is easy to understand the expectations of the public: first, the original film was a comedy storehouse, although based on cultural values far from modern, and especially Russian, realities, and secondly, sequels with large breaks between parts (and 33 years of difference can be called a very long break) rarely work. We should pay tribute to the optimism of Eddie Murphy and his creative team: “Coming to America 2” is audaciously going through the run-down political correctness, contains dozens of successful gags, but overall filmmaking feels outdated, awkward and simply unnecessary in the context of the first part.
The plot of the sequel makes you remember not the original film, but rather another project with Eddie Murphy – “Switch places”. In the second part, Prince Akim becomes king after the death of his father. At the same time, the hero faces a crisis: General Izzy, the dictator of a neighboring country, threatens to invade if their states do not seal the union with a dynastic marriage. The problem is that Akim and his wife Lisa have only three daughters: Princess Micah, Omma and Tinashe. There are rumors that Akim still has an illegitimate son, whose mother he, excuse me, impregnated with his “royal seed” during a visit to New York more than thirty years ago. Akim has fatherly feelings, so he and his faithful assistant Semmy return to Queens.
The first part of “Coming to America” was guided by a different cultural code – you will agree that in 1988, the concept of comedy was different. Eddie Murphy, in creating the sequel, obviously wanted to account for changes in the mainstream. For example, one of the important storylines is the fight against the cursed patriarchy in their fictional country of Zamund. Such enlightenment probably would not have been regarded as insightful in the 1980s. The general idea to which the sequel gently sums up, i.e., “love conquers everything”, generally smears the comedic potential, and the presence of a large number of subplots added for the opportunity to insert a couple of decent jokes, clutters the script and reduces the romance, which makes many of the love aspects of “Coming to America 2” seem far-fetched. As such, the film doesn’t work morally or humorously, so the script is much simpler than it seems.
For the most part, the script of the second part relies on familiar jokes, almost literally repeating the most amusing scenes from the original. However, the context has changed and this is noticeable: the parody of McDonald's, for example, is losing its poignancy, although it's funny to see a black clown in a Zamundan fast food restaurant. As for humor in general, we should remember the status of Eddie Murphy: at the time of filming the original film, he was a stand-up with a rather lashy sense of humor, and now Murphy is a comedian, known primarily for family films like Shrek. Thus, the level of rigidity of “Coming to America 2” was deliberately lowered, which made jokes that were supposed to be on the verge of foul, tasteless. Rather, the comedy in the sequel works precisely in its metatextual form: given how vulnerable black people turn out to be after the death of their icon George Floyd, many of the jokes in Coming to America 2 may look racist and offensive, but therefore no less funny.
The key questions a viewer may ask when watching are Eddie Murphy's comedy skills. Did he lose them years later? The actor remains still energetic, but it is clear that the actor is already tired: although his talents are beyond doubt, the actor often jokes inappropriately. It seems that Murphy voluntarily gives way to the lead actor, despite the fact that this film is supposed to be his benefit. Often, especially from the point of view of the plot, Eddie’s character is only an outside observer of events, and in all its glory he appears only closer to the finale. The one who steals the audience’s attention is Wesley Snipes, who continues the series of non-standard roles that he gets after his release from prison. In this case, he plays the same tyrant from the neighboring country. Also pleased with the appearance of Morgan Freeman in a funny cameo.
If, in principle, there is a fan base for "Coming to America," then the sequel will cause controversy. Orthodox fans will find fault with everything: at least the fact that most of the action takes place in Zamund, not in the United States; and other fans, for sure, will call the sequel a worthy successor of the ideas of the original in terms of jokes “for their own” – this is almost a comedic version of “Black Panther”! But when approached from a film-critical point of view, it is clear that the original is not honored at all: the conceptual power of “Coming to America 2” is weak, and the truly sparkling humor is built on a rather radical thing – mocking the creation of the sequel after 30 years; postirony as it is. Target audiences will be puzzled to scratch their heads, because the reasons for making this film are vague: it is still funny enough to recommend it to watch, especially if you understand who these characters are on the screen, but more broadly, of all the projects that the elderly Murphy and his company could make a sequel to, “Coming to America” seems to have minimal humorous potential, as this film demonstrates.
6 out of 10
I think few would argue that John Landis’s Coming to America is a cult film. Seeing the light of day in 1988, "Coming to America" became a real hit. Collecting impressive box office, equally pleased both viewers and sophisticated critics, as well as several Oscar nominations. Not to mention the fact that many viewers began to get acquainted with the work of Eddie Murphy with this tape and it still occupies honorable places in the tops of favorite films of many viewers. Given all the above, the very idea of creating a sequel to the picture was suicidal and doomed to failure. Since it was obvious that to create something like this, especially in our time is simply impossible. Did director Craig Brewer surprise the audience? Alas, no.
The story revolves around Prince Akim, who is now king. He is still happily married and raising three daughters. However, due to the absence of a son as heir to the throne, the threat of war arises over Zamunda. Meanwhile, he learns that his illegitimate son is growing up in America.
It is worth admitting that the authors of the original tape managed to write a really great script, which equally successfully combined elements of a romantic love story, an instructive story of growing up and numerous gags, bantering everything and everything in its path. The authors of this tape tried to do the same, but nothing worthwhile from this alas did not come out. The romantic love story is no longer Akim himself, but his son turned out to be very superficial and far-fetched. Not letting yourself know the first half of the story and too hastily catching up for lost already in the second half, but with a clear sense of falsehood. The instructive central story arc about the family and its value also turned out to be very superficial. Even if the authors managed to correctly fit modern feminist trends into it without excessive shouting and gamma, like most modern paintings. As for the humor, it turned out very stupid, and with the lack of an age rating of R and the inability to beat below the belt as an original film – also incredibly boring. Personally, I evoked a laugh and a smile in only one scene in the entire film.
Director of this film Craig Brewer pleasantly surprised me in his previous film “My name is Dolemite”, which perfectly played the banter over the chosen topic and great humor. However, how brave was the previous film of the director, so safe and “passable” turned out this film. Having created the impression of a very gray and monotonous work, which seemed to be shot according to the genre templates long ago worn to holes in the best traditions of conveyor, not creative production. Not to mention the completely absent spirit of the original tape.
Eddie Murphy played well, but watching him you see not the grown-up Akim, and Murphy, who can be found in almost every work of the actor in recent years. The veterans of the original tape James Earl Jones, Arsenio Hall and Shari Hidley turned out to be as faded as possible, who gave out a not bad, but absolutely not memorable game. Germaine Fowler repulsively replayed the whole film, and calling acting what Leslie Jones and Tracy Morgan showed on the screen is simply impossible. The only bright spot of the picture was only “the girl from the original tape, barking like a dog” and Wesley Snipes, who perfectly showed his comedic talent on the screen.
4 out of 10
A trip to America 2 is an absolutely passable, incredibly boring and absolutely not funny film, which not only did not recreate the spirit and dignity of the original tape, but is simply perceived as an absolutely lifeless conveyor film. The basic elements for creating an excellent tape on the hands were, but the authors could not use them properly. It is better to review the original film, which even now looks more than good.
I don’t need to describe the plot of this absolutely mediocre sequel to the original 1988 film for at least some introduction to a future viewer, because it completely repeats the original. Only with one exception. Now the hero’s unexpectedly found bastard son is once again walking his father’s path. Step by step. From not wanting to be with a rich bride, to falling in love with a simple hairdresser. Yeah, we've seen all this before. They are the same characters and the same actors. Perhaps it is worth noting a good game of Wesley Snipes in the role of the main & #39; antagonist', and about all the others we can say only one thing. Unfortunately, we are getting older.
The film no longer has the charm of America of the late eighties, no naivety, no great humor that was in the first part. There are a few jokes in the whole movie, and then you just sit there and get bored. Everything is very artificial and fake. Like a lion in a movie.
Somewhere in the middle it seemed to me that absolutely everything was filmed only in ' Palace' King Zamunda. What immediately hinted at the fact that the authors did not start ' bother'. By the end of the film, nothing had changed. All scenes of the film are shot in three sets, all completely secondary. Same palace, same hair salon. And yes, the viewer also within the framework of the memoirs of the characters a few minutes show excerpts from the previous film. Now it is clear why this creation was not played in cinemas, and immediately released on the Internet.
You don’t need to spoil your mood and it’s better to just review the original film. 5 out of 10 for just that feeling of waiting for the sequel to happen all the time.
I belong to those people who grew up on the first film about Eddie Murphy’s trip to America and since childhood knew the cult phrase ' the royal penis is clean' therefore, the sequel was very happy, along the way glad that this is not a remake, doomed to humiliation in advance.
Despite the green color of my review, I will make a reservation right away, the film turned out to be more primitive than the first, mainly in terms of the depth of the characters’ disclosure, but this is not such a big drawback, since we are already well acquainted with most of the characters. And those who are not familiar, for those in the film inserted a good part of the scenes from the original tape, and they were even slightly expanded, for which the actors had to rejuvenate with the help of graphics.
The plot of the second part develops rapidly, the viewer is quickly introduced to the course of things, telling how Akim’s life developed after the wedding and how things are in modern Zamund. We learn almost immediately that Akim has an illegitimate son, born in America and the only possible heir to the throne, as the three daughters of the king do not have the right to do so.
Along the way, Akim needs to settle relations with the dictator of the neighboring territory, played inimitably by Wesley Snipes. This actor I associate exclusively with the role of brutal Blade, here he is a hero in the style of Dr. Evil, caricatured, but very charismatic. I have enjoyed every single one of his appearances.
To be sure, I didn’t see any white actors in the film, the film was clearly on the agenda and many jokes touch on the subject of color and racial discrimination. But even with the use of such borderline themes, as well as jokes about washing the royal loins, the movie turned out very kind. Each character here carries some positive, all the plot twists eventually come to the point of kindness and mutual understanding, and the accompanying jokes, though not enchanting, but funny and do not give the toilet. I didn’t laugh to tears, but I smiled for an hour and a half.
Prepare for the fact that there will be a lot of music, dancing and interesting bright costumes. You’ll see almost every character in the first movie, and even Morgan Freeman, who wasn’t in the first movie. I also hope you enjoy watching as much as I did. Ideally, watch it in the company of friends or parents (my mother, for example, loves the first part and I will definitely watch this film with her), so you can enjoy nostalgia and discuss how great the actors look even after 30 years. It’s not a movie you have to think about, you have to watch it for fun.
The most important thing is that, having touched on all the relevant topics such as racism and feminism, the film does not look tortured or sucked out of the finger. There is a feeling that the guys just gathered and themselves had a great fun, putting a piece of their soul into this creation. So the aftertaste of the film remains the most pleasant and even pushes on such feats as writing a positive review.
I did a 6 first, but it's been the second day I'm sick of what a great movie it is, so I'll probably switch to a 7. The guys did their best.