IMDb user comments for
2 Fast 2 Furious (2003) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 32:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

311 comments in total

---

17 out of 22 people found the following comment useful :-
Slow acting, slow action, 25 June 2003

Author: harlaken from Cincinnati/Ohio

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Having seen and enjoyed the first movie I had moderate hope for this one but it looks like yet another sequel that should never have been made. It's impossible to know just how bad the acting was as dialog was contrived and uncomfortable and probably wouldn't have sounded natural from even the best speakers. However, bad acting is bad acting and this was certainly about as bad as it comes. The one exception to this was ludacris who was suprisingly enjoyable while on screen but those times were too short and too far between. All of this could easily have been forgiven though if the action measured up. After all, this isn't hamlet right? Unfortunately "2 fast" fell short here as well unless one likes seeing gear shifts, speed-o needles, and mechanically impossible driving sequences. In the year of the matrix, the hulk, and later return of the king this one simply wont measure up to it's competition and in the lexicon of exciting driving movies (Fast and the Furious, Blue Brothers, Gone in Sixty Seconds, etc.) it doesn't even deserve mention.

************** Spoilers *****************

What really irks me are the incredibly fake driving sequences. You don't need to know much about cars to know that you can't drive at freeway speeds in reverse, most care are geared even lower in reverse than in first. HEAVY duty swerving as seen in the opening race scenes can't be done at anything higher than 40 (try it sometime but don't sue me when you roll it or fishtail right off the road). Star Wars type light speed effects don't happen at 80 miles an hour (or even 120) regardless of what you're dumping into your engine. In the final scene you see the speed-o creep past 90, 100, 110, 120 all to barely eek past a boat that wouldn't be capable of speeds greater than 25 or so. The one and only interesting stunt is the well done truck scene which is shown in it's entirety (yes, it's only about 10 seconds) during the previews.

---

12 out of 14 people found the following comment useful :-
I hate to say it but..., 19 October 2003
Author: QueenofBean from in trance

I am going to anyway. This movie was nowhere near as good as the original. Without the camaraderie between characters that existed between Turetto and his gang, all we had was the same movie, only now there are two undercover brothers and a really "bad" guy. There was a lot of potential here to create something great, but I don't think it was achieved. Then again, if all you're after is some fast driving, and no-brain action, you'll probably LOVE this movie! I don't even care for Vin Diesel all that much, but his presence was sorely missed here!

---

18 out of 27 people found the following comment useful :-
2 Lame 2 Watch, 23 July 2003

Author: Rob Taylor (Rob_Taylor) from London

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Lordy Lord! Another crap sequel from the Hollywood stable of rubbish rehashes. I had low expectations of this movie....it doesn't have Vin Diesel in it for a start. But what I got was a collection of wooden actors and cheesy lines, interspersed with "race" sequences that made me laugh a lot. I should have realised it was going to be dire literally from the get-go. The Universal logo mutates into a chrome-plated wheel in the most irritatingly ludicrous manner. Spoilers ahead.

So what is so horrible about this film? For a start the acting sucks worse than a Dyson. The opening race meet scene had me cringing in my seat, hoping it would get better. It didn't. Then there's the plot, or lack of one. Let's rehash the first film and nobody'll notice. Bah!

The scripting is awful. The hero's buddy (name escapes me due to disinterest) actually steals something from a supposed drug-baron (again not sure if he was a drug-baron, was fighting the urge to read the paper at the time) whilst the latter is offering him a job. Come on! That makes about as much sense as ....well....nothing! You just would not do that, unless you were the world's most retarded individual. Sadly, his character survives the movie. Then there's the villain's two goons, who come across as stereotypical thick grunts who haven't had an original thought between them for years. Tiresomely predictable.

The cars all look like they've escaped from a Scalextric set, with the exception of the hero's racer, which has had the "mobile tanning salon" upgrade. Damn, but he's gonna get skin cancer and cattaracts if he continues to drive that! Then you have to wonder just what sort of engine can accelerate a car from 0-80 in gasp!, only 20 seconds! Such speed! G-Forces pulling.....can't continue.....review.....must hit....brake! Yep, I could take my old Vauxhall Vectra out and give these machines a run for their money! Twenty seconds....sheeeshh!

The crowning hilarity regarding the race scenes was that a) the cars apparently needed nitrous to reach 100mph, and b) When they hit the nitro the cars went into hyperspace. I'm serious! Everything blurred and streaked past. Everytime it happened I kept expecting to see Chewbacca pop up from the back, waving a wrench and going "Whoooaarrhg!" Give me a break! I have to say this had me in stitches every time it happened but I'm surprised they didn't resort to burning tire-tracks a la Back to the Future as well. So lame.

Another annoying fact is that Hollywood seems to think that 80mph is fast and 100mph only reachable by real racer types. Obviously they've never been on any British motorway. And our hero clocked 150mph in his death-defying leap off a bridge. It would all perhaps seem more impressive than it was, if the streets were narrower, or you actually cared about any of the characters. Or that a motorcyclist wasn't clocked on the M1 doing 157 mph. And he didn't even have R2D2 on the back, much less Chewie.

So, underwhelmed would be the best word to sum up this film. The racing isn't exciting, the acting is bad and the plot is some Miami Vice reworking with incredulous bits thrown in for bad measure. All in all, a better name for this film might have been "The Dull and the Repetitive"

---

32 out of 55 people found the following comment useful :-
Is this a sequel ?, 23 December 2005

Author: lordsaves777 from Puerto Rico

I don't think this movie deserves to be called a sequel to "The Fast and the Furious",not because it is a bad movie,it is great and it does not fail to entertain most of the public,but for those who really liked the first one,this one is not a sequel.The first was very original,its conflicts were original,the movie was really about cars,and driving,and street racing,this one,in the other hand,presents us conflicts that we have seen for the last decades,the police couple that don't like each other,and at the end of the movie they finish kissing and hugging each other,the guy that falls in love with a woman that could make him fail his mission,the guy that has a drug empire in Miami,and pretends to become more powerful,the police that's trying to stop him,this are most of the conflicts we see in this movie,and we have seen in other movies,so it's not original.The Fast and the Furious was very original with great conflicts,it wasn't as fun as "its sequel",but it was awesome as well.But I think that this is the reason why this movie was released in the summer,to make critics say "well,is not original it has some cars stunts that are hard to believe,but is a summer movie,what the hell".I also did not like the decision of the director of making the movie in Miami because usually the backgrounds of street racing are nocturnes,Miami is usually more popular on daylight,street racing is usually on high ways in big cities like New York or Los Angeles,but it is clear that the director was just trying to make the movie more attractive to the summer-movie lovers because a lot of people identifies Miami with summer.This movie is more like a cop movie than a street racing movie,you can notice how hard is for the writers to make a space for races,and how easy is for the writers to find space for those things that usually a cop has to deal with.Is not a bad movie,but it is not original,and it cant be called a sequel.

---

14 out of 20 people found the following comment useful :-
Multi-ethnic cast goes vroom, vroom, vroooooommmm, 10 June 2003
Author: Dr. Gore (drgore@hotmail.com) from Los Angeles, California

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

*SPOILER ALERT* *SPOILER ALERT*

"2 Fast 2 Furious" is the embodiment of modern action movie formulas. PG-13. Rap music blasting. Multi-ethnic cast. This flick could play in any corner of the globe and would surely appeal to someone. They set it in Miami which is one of the most heavily mixed cities in America. You have a white guy as the star who is best friends with a black guy. Classic. Then they have them follow around a beautiful Latin woman as a potential love interest. Great. They even threw in a hot Asian girl who had no other function than to be a hot Asian girl. I loved her car readout monitor too. It looked like an angry "Hello Kitty!".

So "2 Fast 2 Furious" is right off the cookie cutter Hollywood action flick assembly line. People love seeing other people who look just like them in movies. So dang it, put them all in! Soon Hollywood will break down barriers in India and China, (one billion potential movie ticket buyers in each country people!), and we can get a Bombay set action movie starring some white action hero and his lovable sidekick from the Kashmir valley. Oh and throw in Suki from this flick for the love interest. Cha-ching.

As far as the racing scenes go, "2 Fast 2 Furious" is pretty good. The speedometers got more close-ups than some of the cast members. Actually the cars probably should have gotten credited in the cast as well. There seems to be one way to do a racing scene: Close-ups on the drivers eyes, then on the speedometer as it goes up and up, then to the cars zipping by, then repeat from step one.

As a movie, "2 Fast 2 Furious" gets a little more ridiculous as it goes on. There's only so many cars racing by I can watch and still say cool. It probably lasted as long as it could before dipping into vroom vroom tedium.

---

26 out of 45 people found the following comment useful :-
Dumb Action Movie That's Enjoyable, 2 June 2005

Author: christian123

2 Fast 2 Furious lives up to its title and delivers some very cool scenes. Brian O'Connor {Paul Walker}, now a disgraced cop, fell victim to it--and now he's paying the price. As far as his bosses and the FBI brass are concerned, the hothead undercover officer threw one of their largest investigations ever. After losing his badge and any chance of redemption along with it, O'Connor is given one last chance when the feds in Miami need his help to collar Carter Verone, a flashy businessman whose using his import/export business as a cover for an international money laundering cartel. Brian isn't alone though as he has his old friend Roman Pearce {Tyrese} and undercover agent Monica Fuentes{ Eva Mendes} to help him out. The plot may sound bad and if you can't look past it then this isn't the film for you. This film is only worth watching if there are exciting action scenes. For the most part, the film doesn't disappoint in that category but the rest of the film isn't very strong. The acting is bad, worse then the original even. Paul Walker doesn't have enough charisma to be a lead and he also doesn't have much talent. Eva Mendes does an okay job and she is probably the best actress in this film. Tyrese should stick to modeling as his acting is very poor. Ludicrous may have top billing but he isn't in the film very much. Cole Hauser does an average job of playing a bad guy. He isn't about to set the world on fire but his performance isn't terrible either. John Singleton directs and does a better job then Rob Cohen did yet the film is still lacking in a good story. 2 Fast 2 Furious is a sequel in the loosest definition of the word. Only one star returns, there's a new director, actors, producers etc. It doesn't really matter though as the cars are the real stars. The cars in this film are pretty cool and look really nice. This film is of course very unrealistic as some of the stunts break the laws of gravity. The running time is 107 minutes though sometimes the film seems longer. A lot of people were complaining that Vin wasn't in this one. I'm kind of glad though as he wasn't that impressive in the original. Is this one better then the original? I liked it more as it wasn't as boring as the original. In the end, this film has plenty of action to deliver but not much in the story or the acting which brings it down. Rating 6/10, above average action flick.

---

20 out of 35 people found the following comment useful :-
A GREAT FUN flick, I am just here for the entertainment..., 24 June 2003

Author: flash-108 from Houston

Fast cars, pretty girls, high speed chases, solid racing. What you were expecting maybe "Gone with the Wind"? This is a fun thing to watch suspend disbelief at the door and enjoy yourself for the time its on the screen. Reminded me a lot of classic car shows of the seventies(i. e. Starsky and Hutch, Dukes of Hazzard etc.) You want some serious drama go see something else. You want an entertaining 2 hours go see this.

---

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
Equal sequel with the original, but more of the same, 13 December 2003
Author: AmericanMan101

Average sequel about Officer Brian O'Connor, fired from the LAPD, goes to Miami, to redeem himself and get his badge back. He also meets an old friend, Roman Pearce, who accompanies him. They get help from a street racer, and put in an effort to redeem themselves by racing the streets of Miami.

Again, it is a teen movie. Yes, yes, we've heard it before. But in this movie, it is a bit different from the first. It has a better plot, expanded action scenes, and so on. But, at points the action does go a bit too far (all of the cars releasing from the garage), and some bad acting. Overall, "2 Fast 2 Furious" is worth viewing if you liked the first. Otherwise, 'act a fool' and let it be.

2.5 out of 5.

---

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
2 Dumb 2 Unlikely, 18 September 2003

Author: Espen Tandberg from Oslo, Norway

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I'm car nut at heart, and I remember how I look forward to the release of "The Fast and The Furious" two years ago. Finally a movie target towards us with a slightly higher passion for cars then the average Joe, I thought. So I was very disapointed to find that the movie had a silly storyline and was all about dumb kids with a fancy for neon lights and big spoilers. The racing scenes had nothing to do with racing, at least not the kind of racing we have in this world.

The sequel is even worse - 3400 hp cars with afterburnes, an endless amount of gears and the ability to fly faster than the Star Trek Voyager (the scenery actually blurs as the cars go into warp mode). It's like watching the replay from some sience fiction game on a Playstation.

If you haven't seen this movie, don't bother to.

---

8 out of 12 people found the following comment useful :-
great action, great racing, 12 June 2003

Author: jason ehrenberg (jehren@iastate.edu) from columbus, oh

i understand when people say it is a forced second movie, and i can see when people say it has a thin plot. knowing that going into the movie, i'd say it's excelent. as long as you're not looking for a deep plot, this movie is all you'd expect. action, and racing, and girls. that's what you are hoping for, right?

---

---

Page 1 of 32:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	Awards
Newsgroup reviews	External reviews	Parents Guide
Official site	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user comments	Your vote history