Spoonixel Amateur movie with Big budget

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

porcupinewebb The cast of the first film are re-united in this comedy caper, and they actually do catch at least one fish between the drinking and the hangovers. Some of the jokes might go over your head and you even need some history to understand one of them.I keep reading that this series of films will not be understood by Americans and that good comedy is funny in any language. That simply is not true and I believe that many 'Friends' or 'Frasier' fans from ANY part of the world will not get even a fraction of the humour when they watch this in their native language. My tip:- if you watch a dubbed or subtitled version of this and do not find it too funny, become Reivo, buy a ticket to Russia or the Ukraine, make some friends and live the film and when you come back to your own world look around and tell me which you can identify with more. You might like it and the experience will put a whole new slant on things you have found un-funny. You probably did not think much of Fawlty Towers either. The only thing from America that comes close would be MASH.

N. N. Peculiarities of national fishing is sometimes funny, but too often it merely celebrates its own imagined magnificence.The "drop the cow" plot in its predecessor was funny, but it isn't quite funny to refer to it like this film is doing it; even though some laconic remarks like "Ford... creative!" are.The same goes for the generals monologues, there's no substance, no absurdity, not even oddness, they are plainly boring and repetitive, I must add.Also, the "mermaid" plot and the "watching the moon" scenes were a mere waste of time. But enough of bashing. There were some upsides too.The "love on first sight" number was truly funny because it was so insanely stupid. Also things like "For a woman being deaf is a bad thing. She needs to hear words." and "What should an intelligent person think of this?" were making me laugh, at least. The whole "pantomime" scene was funny and so were the again quite laconic remarks of the police man concerning the explosion mechanism of sea mines and the subsequent behavior of the two castaways.But then again, the whole "submarine" plot was not only a waste of time, it was annoying. So that, in the end, you have a typical sequel, often dull, sometimes topping its predecessor, but in the end a less felicitous film.

shristov This movie is not for americans. They won't understand it. But everybody else will just love it. I think this is the best one of the "Osobennosti natsionalnoj ..." films.

grob248 Just like its predecessor "Osobennosti Nazionalnoi Okhoty," this movie has this "it's too Russian for the outsiders to understand"-vibe going on. Not that it's a lot of fun to watch even if you are Russian. With exception of a few funny gags that are based on Russian drunkyard humor (which, indeed, is probably too Russian for the outsiders to understand; then again, if you think you can get it - give it a try), there is nothing the movie has to offer. The only exception is interesting rumination by Buldakov's character about the role and influence of vodka in Russian life and national character. If this sounds intriguing to you - watch the movie, if not - forget it.