Extraction 2

[highway]

Thought this was better as an action film than John Wick 4. Tremendous choreography and a delight to sit and feast on a Saturday night. Hemsworth has charisma to spare. Well worth your time as good as the first one.

[baconsarney]

highway said:

Thought this was better as an action film than John Wick 4. Tremendous choreography and a delight to sit and feast on a Saturday night. Hemsworth has charisma to spare. Well worth your time as good as the first one.

Yep totally agree....

[six wheels]

Fantastic film.

[RowntreesCabana]

I thought it was very poor compared to the original. The prison scene onwards was like watching a kid play Call of Duty, there was zero tension, no connection with the characters, relentless to the extent that I didn't care and became bored. The first one managed to create tension and was pretty non stop too, but it worked far better and had me on the edge of my seat. This was the equivalent of watching a basketball game when someone scores a 3 pointer every 30 seconds. Everyone's trying to be John Wick, which has become the same boring non stop ste. I really liked the first JW too, the second one not so much, but 3 and 4 were just terrible.

Movies for the tiktok generations I think. No thanks.

[glennjamin]

Saw Extraction 2 on Netflix menu last night, hadn't watched first film so watched Extraction 1 last night great film, going to watch Extraction 2 tonight ..

[phil-sti]

It was a decent action film. The prison battle scene was good.

[Radec]

I wrote about it on the film's thread on Friday, very enjoyable action film.
The prison break to the train, one take sequence I thought was done brilliantly even though it might have looked like a level from a Time Crisis game.

[21TonyK]

For me, has to be one of the worst films I've seen in a long time.

Everyone enjoys something different I guess.

[V8covin]

Decided to catch up on the original before watching 2.
The body count must be in the 100's

[Dracoro]

Couldn’t get through the 1st one.

Seemed to be action scenes and no real story line

Fine if you just want to see a mindless action film, but seen too many of them to last a lifetime.

[Skeptisk]

V8covin said:

Decided to catch up on the original before watching 2.
The body count must be in the 100's

I found it quite one dimensional and the fight scenes seemed very similar, were too long and it got boring.

The majority of the 100s killed were police officers. I wonder what the reception would have been if the protagonist had been Indian and had murdered 100s of British or American cops to save a drug lord’s son. Would that have played out well over here?

I am not adverse to pointless action films or ultra violence eg I quite enjoyed last year’s Nobody. It just needs to be done well.

[V8covin]

Dracoro said:

Couldn’t get through the 1st one.

Seemed to be action scenes and no real story line

Fine if you just want to see a mindless action film, but seen too many of them to last a lifetime.

2 is even worse,gave up after an hour.
Made for the Call of duty generation I guess ,never having played it ?

[Leon R]

Skeptisk said:

V8covin said:

Decided to catch up on the original before watching 2.
The body count must be in the 100's

I found it quite one dimensional and the fight scenes seemed very similar, were too long and it got boring.

The majority of the 100s killed were police officers. I wonder what the reception would have been if the protagonist had been Indian and had murdered 100s of British or American cops to save a drug lord’s son. Would that have played out well over here?

I am not adverse to pointless action films or ultra violence eg I quite enjoyed last year’s Nobody. It just needs to be done well.

Does the protagonist actually kill any police officers? I don’t remember that happening at all.

[Skeptisk]

Leon R said:

Skeptisk said:

V8covin said:

Decided to catch up on the original before watching 2.
The body count must be in the 100's

I found it quite one dimensional and the fight scenes seemed very similar, were too long and it got boring.

The majority of the 100s killed were police officers. I wonder what the reception would have been if the protagonist had been Indian and had murdered 100s of British or American cops to save a drug lord’s son. Would that have played out well over here?

I am not adverse to pointless action films or ultra violence eg I quite enjoyed last year’s Nobody. It just needs to be done well.

Does the protagonist actually kill any police officers? I don’t remember that happening at all.

When he first rescues the boy he kills gangsters but after that it is mainly police/army they get killed (he beats up but doesn’t kill the young gangsters who try to capture him).

[Dynion Araf Uchaf]

RowntreesCabana said:

I thought it was very poor compared to the original. The prison scene onwards was like watching a kid play Call of Duty, there was zero tension, no connection with the characters, relentless to the extent that I didn't care and became bored. The first one managed to create tension and was pretty non stop too, but it worked far better and had me on the edge of my seat. This was the equivalent of watching a basketball game when someone scores a 3 pointer every 30 seconds. Everyone's trying to be John Wick, which has become the same boring non stop ste. I really liked the first JW too, the second one not so much, but 3 and 4 were just terrible.

Movies for the tiktok generations I think. No thanks.

Agree with most of this. But still thought it was ok.

[Leon R]

Skeptisk said:

Leon R said:

Skeptisk said:

V8covin said:

Decided to catch up on the original before watching 2.
The body count must be in the 100's

I found it quite one dimensional and the fight scenes seemed very similar, were too long and it got boring.

The majority of the 100s killed were police officers. I wonder what the reception would have been if the protagonist had been Indian and had murdered 100s of British or American cops to save a drug lord’s son. Would that have played out well over here?

I am not adverse to pointless action films or ultra violence eg I quite enjoyed last year’s Nobody. It just needs to be done well.

Does the protagonist actually kill any police officers? I don’t remember that happening at all.

When he first rescues the boy he kills gangsters but after that it is mainly police/army they get killed (he beats up but doesn’t kill the young gangsters who try to capture him).

Ah right the first film.

They were all in the pocket of the main bad guy so they are bad guys by association, its a well known thing in films that the good guy only kills the 'bad guys'.

[Skeptisk]

Leon R said:

Skeptisk said:

Leon R said:

Skeptisk said:

V8covin said:

Decided to catch up on the original before watching 2.
The body count must be in the 100's

I found it quite one dimensional and the fight scenes seemed very similar, were too long and it got boring.

The majority of the 100s killed were police officers. I wonder what the reception would have been if the protagonist had been Indian and had murdered 100s of British or American cops to save a drug lord’s son. Would that have played out well over here?

I am not adverse to pointless action films or ultra violence eg I quite enjoyed last year’s Nobody. It just needs to be done well.

Does the protagonist actually kill any police officers? I don’t remember that happening at all.

When he first rescues the boy he kills gangsters but after that it is mainly police/army they get killed (he beats up but doesn’t kill the young gangsters who try to capture him).

Ah right the first film.

They were all in the pocket of the main bad guy so they are bad guys by association, its a well known thing in films that the good guy only kills the 'bad guys'.

it seemed objectionable to me that all the Bangladesh police and army became killable bad guys just because their boss, who they presumably didn’t know nor could hold to account, had a deal with a gangster. Using that logic then surely the drug lord’s son deserved to die. I appreciate that such action films and rational arguments don’t often meet!

I don’t think it would have been acceptable in the US or U.K. - certainly I couldn’t imagine the “hero” in a film slaughtering dozens of boys in blue because the chief of police was corrupt. Double standards.

[Leon R]

Plenty of double standards in films tbh.

Look how often an English guy is the villain.

Edited by Leon R on Tuesday 4th July 17:22

Edited by Leon R on Tuesday 4th July 17:23

[LM240]

RowntreesCabana said:

I thought it was very poor compared to the original. The prison scene onwards was like watching a kid play Call of Duty, there was zero tension, no connection with the characters, relentless to the extent that I didn't care and became bored. The first one managed to create tension and was pretty non stop too, but it worked far better and had me on the edge of my seat. This was the equivalent of watching a basketball game when someone scores a 3 pointer every 30 seconds. Everyone's trying to be John Wick, which has become the same boring non stop ste. I really liked the first JW too, the second one not so much, but 3 and 4 were just terrible.

Movies for the tiktok generations I think. No thanks.

Watched it last night.

I enjoy this type of film and was looking forward to watching it, but thought was was pretty poor. Barely credible, poor characters, holes everywhere. 5/10.

Also agree about John Wick. The last one in particular became boring, just wishing the fight scenes would end due to the monotonous nature of them.

[cobra kid]

LM240 said:

Also agree about John Wick. The last one in particular became boring, just wishing the fight scenes would end due to the monotonous nature of them.

The film would be an hour long then. If that!