AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

ChicDragon It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

Payno I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Hattie I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

Paul Magne Haakonsen This sequel was not even half as fun and entertaining as the first "Horrible Bosses" movie was. Why? Well, it just had too much of a mundane and generic storyline, and it was lacking the originality and humor that was present in the first movie.Sure the movie had a good ensemble of actors and actresses, and it was nice to see people revisit their roles from the first movie, but it was a shame that they had so very little to work with in terms of a proper script and storyline. Jason Bateman, Jason Sudeikis and Charlie Day certainly did carry the movie. It was also some nice performances from Jennifer Aniston, Kevin Spacey, Jamie Foxx, Chris Pine, Christoph Waltz and Jonathan Banks, just a shame that they had such small roles to play.There were some casual laughs here and there, but the movie just felt forced and was running on autopilot. And that is what made this movie crash and burn for me. It simply lacked originality and the ability to bring out some good and proper laughs.This is hardly a movie that you will watch a second time.

Defected74 While the first movie was hilarious and worthy of watching more than once, Horrible Bosses 2 proves that some actors (Charlie Day and Jason Sudiekis) lack skills. Why does Charlie Day have to yell all his lines and pretend he's still on It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia? Why does Jason Sudiekis always have to be a male chauvinistic pig? Jason Bateman is the only one of the three worth watching here.

talibliresad It could be a very nice and funny movie, if those 3 guys were not that much stupid, especially 2 of them. First movie was good, guys were crazy a little bit, but not that ridiculously foolish. But this time it really sucks. This situation is not entertain movie audience, but only makes us feel annoyed & nervous.

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.