Written October 25, 2014
Another nail biter. This is one of the rare times that a sequel is as good or better than the 1st movie. I would definitely see it again.
Written December 28, 2014
It was a shell of the original. The fight scenes were mediocre and you didn't get the feeling of justified gratuitous violence the original gave you. It was the same let down you get from reading a great book then watching a weak movie adaptation. The motivation to see him lay waste to a gang of scumbags was replaced by watching him beating up actors or stuntmen. When he escaped from his captors it didn't take any real ingenuity just some conveniently place elements that anyone with a brain and a green belt in karate could escape from. I almost felt bad for the actors playing Albanians. I don't know why they made this movie other than a trip to Istanbul and an incredibly inexpensive budget. I don't think it costs much to destroy a couple cars, blow up a couple grenades, and shoot a couple boxes of ammo. Nice hotel though and pretty fly over shots they kept reusing.
Written January 30, 2015
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.
Written November 28, 2014
the movie was great and i personality think it was way better then the first one its a must go , i will def see it again
Written March 31, 2015
I was thinking twice about yet another ''2" version, as the first movie was right on. You will not be disappointed the second one was just as entertaining.