While the Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard is a sequel to a script that wasn’t based on an already existing ip it still feels like a stretch to call it a original.This sequel does ambitiously aim to be an entirely unlike any other movie simply by being so derivative and out now weird that you might think it’s an okay watch. “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard” is a fast-paced film, almost as fast-paced as its title suggests. This movie is for you if you’ve ever strolled into a movie theatre with a craving for rehashed jokes and performers earning salaries right in front of your eyes on the cinema.
People wanted a sequel, so here it is… sort of. “The Hitman’s Bodyguard” fared exceptionally well internationally despite selling poorly in the United States, resulting in star-vehicle money for Denzel Washington. Not terrible for a one-off, but something to keep in the theatre “forced laughs” section.
Nothing new in whole 120 mins movie
There’s hardly anything fresh here; it’s just a tediously long journey that’s supposed to last 95 minutes but seems like two and a half. Ryan Reynolds and Samuel L. Jackson reprise their roles as a bodyguard and a hitman who despise one another. Salma Hayek manages a few outlandish chuckles, but by the one-hour point, her material has worn thin. Director Patrick Hughes isn’t afraid to overwhelm the spectator with information overload, but there’s a lack of nuance here. Even a smidgeon of it.
Is it really necessary to go through the narrative again? Antonio Banderas’ maniac adores Greece, therefore he wants to dominate Europe and return sovereignty to the Greeks… or something along those lines. The irritating three must stop him while treading over each other’s feet every five minutes and standing in the path of an Interpol agent (Frank Grillo).
The writing is the big loser here.
This batch of words and acts contains very little new information. It’s full with frat guy comedy and vulgarity that would make Quentin Tarantino cringe. It’s the type of cussing an adolescent does when he or she is eager for recognition and has exhausted all other options. The outcome is a succession of intermittent chuckles interspersed with repetitious brutality and predictable storey turns.
Morgan Freeman (who appears in just about every film and advertisement these days) appears at one time to spice it up. When he shares a battle scene with one of our finest performers of all time, though, he can’t do much more than elicit unintended chuckles.
Only reason to watch
Once again, the film’s success is due to the on-screen chemistry between the three stars. Reynolds and Jackson get right into their regular squabbles, and Michael’s refusal to carry a gun—relying instead on pepper spray and his trusty Swiss Army knife (“they never see it coming”) because his therapist told him not to—makes for a good running comedy. Hayek’s physical humour, as well as his extremely extended, obscene rants in Spanish, are once again on display. The two leads do their hardest to improve the content, but it’s an impossible task. Reynolds’ exquisite joke delivery can’t elevate a script with three distinct sets of hands on it, and Jackson is on cruise control. I imagine the writers passed the laptop around while watching “Drunk History.”
Is it completely pointless? No. If you happen to be near a restaurant on a rainy night, take this one out and enjoy it with some nice pizza and wine. A good supper is the one thing that can make a terrible movie better. Julian Brand, actor and movie critics, rates it a 1.5/5 and says “The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard” is otherwise a complete waste of time and money. It makes you regretfully recall a time when sequels were not a guarantee