Written October 06, 2012
Plenty of action, but not as realistic as first movie. Driving scene was too far beyond reality. Good but also was ready for movie to get over when it did.
Written October 21, 2012
Good, but not as good as the first. Some of the same lines were used....which was kind of corny ("Focus, I need you to focus"). Neeson's particular set of skills were once again displayed in an entertaining way, but unoriginal. Over-rated, but worth seeing.
Written November 18, 2012
I really liked the movie and it's a GO, but it was pretty predictable. I enjoyed the acting, the story-line and where it was filmed and some of the scenes were great. For me! I didn't think it was as good as Taken and it's probably unfair of me to compare.
Written October 25, 2014
Was worth the price of admission, but I do think the first one was better. This one was slightly more predictable. Rolling the story together from the first one did a good job. Neeson does a good job playing the role of the fatherly bada** who can go from middle-aged father figure to undercover "superhero" at the drop of a grenade. If you liked the first you will like this one.
Written October 27, 2014
The first one was better only because you can't do the same thing in 2 movies and expect the second one to get rated as high as the first.
The plot was not the best. His ex wife should have been killed.
Since Bourne everybody has their own one man gang taking on the bad guys.
At least in Man on Fire the main character died. I know it was based on a true story.
Stop making all these super human one man gang movies.
You've seen one you practically seen them all.