Solemplex
To me, this movie is perfection.
GamerTab
That was an excellent one.
BelSports
This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.
Brainsbell
The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.
Ian
(Flash Review)Funnier than most modern stupid comedies; low bar. Thus achieves its objective. Three yahoos quit their job because the movie's title implies they have horrible bosses and attempt to start their own business to be their own bosses with a silly 'shower buddy' invention. They get screwed by an investor and concoct a revenge scheme. Will they be able to pull it off to save their new business? There are oodles of lewd hijinks blended with lots of sexual and potty humor. While the movie often pokes fun at itself and its movie genre, it did it's best to cobble together a mix tape soundtrack to medium success. Overall, there are some good zingers, a couple plot twists and eye rolling situations but above average for the genre.
bakidarakari
If you compare part 2 with it's predecessor then 1st part was much better.Nick is as usual Nick but Kurt and Dale were really irritating.Dale took to an extreme height.there was one point where I wished he was not in the movie.Kevin is as usual interesting so as Jamie Foxx.if there is any next part then they should be given more screen space.
d.rust
Doesn't that just say it all? A Horrible sequel. A Horrible movie. Horrible Acting. Horrible Writing. Horrible and stupid, too! So... the premise of the movie is that they had Horrible Bosses in the first movie, and now they want to try to *be* bosses? Except that it isn't the Boss who is the antagonist, it's the investor? Wait, wait, wait. That is so stupid. Why didn't they call it Horrible Investors? Or better yet, Imbecile Entrepreneurs? After some imbecilic moments with that Horrible "actor"/"comedian" Keegan-Michael Kee-diot, these three morons decide to not ask obvious questions and screw up what could have possibly been a very short movie. Sigh. That would have saved us all some time.In total, I would give this crap-fest 0 stars, and have the producers sued for wasting Oscar winning talent for a rancid, smelly turkey without cranberry sauce.
sol-
Kidnapping rather than murder is on the agenda this time round as the three friends from the first film look to get revenge on a shady businessman who tricked them out of a fortune in this follow-up to the 2011 hit comedy. Most of the original cast is back and while Kevin Spacey, Jamie Foxx and Jennifer Aniston are given disappointingly little to do, the chemistry between the three leads is as strong as ever with their great comic timing the main reason to see the film. Unfortunately, the characters seem even more inept, clumsy and foolish this time round, which sometimes makes them difficult to relate to. They each have their fair share of funny moments though, with Jason Bateman's mistaken belief that he has waltzed into an AA meeting a clear highlight as well as the opening scene in which an automatic shower invention looks incredibly 'wrong' when viewed at a certain angle. Not all the gags are that good (an extra-long freight train is excruciating) but ultimately the film has more hits than misses with a cunning Chris Pine actually outclassing Christoph Waltz as his even slyer father. As with the first film, movie references are used to good effect too. All the 'Predator' quips are highly amusing, as is the trio modeling their kidnapping on 'Nine to Five' and then debating who of them is the Fonda, Tomlin and Parton of their clan. Sure, this is not as fresh and funny as the first film... but how many comedy sequels are? Viewed with the right expectations, it is hard to imagine the film disappointing anyone who liked the trio's chemistry in Part One.
