Mjeteconer Just perfect...

VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

MusicChat It's complicated... I really like the directing, acting and writing but, there are issues with the way it's shot that I just can't deny. As much as I love the storytelling and the fantastic performance but, there are also certain scenes that didn't need to exist.

Mathilde the Guild Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

bob the moo The return of Trainspotting to the screen such a weird bit of timing. The cast are almost all moved on to very successful careers in cinema and television, with a range of big and personal projects between them. Likewise the film sits in a period in the mid-90's where cinema seemed so vibrant with ideas and new directors (most of whom are now the new establishment); so returning to a place with that establishment didn't think it would work - particularly seeing so many big name actors trying to convince as broken shells. It felt like it would be an exercise in looking back, rather than being a new film in and of itself.I thought this would be a negative, but actually this is what the film does, but it is a strength not a weakness. The film reconnects with the characters, who are all in their different places, some having moved more than others. Regardless though, they are all looking back. Some of them look back with fondness when their violence was at its peak, others feel regret for what little they have to show for life - some putting that on themselves, others putting it into blame on others for closing off options. This sense of hitting a certain age and looking back is universal I think, and it works well here. The base plot is not as good, but this element of nostalgia (fond and regretful) mixes across the film well and carries it through.It also allows the film to do what it does in terms of style. It references the original film a lot, but thanks to this theme, it doesn't feel like it is trying to replicate it or ride on its coattails, but rather it is a touchpoint for the characters, the cast, the crew, and the viewer. Doing this strengthens that theme. Of course, it also repeats the energy of the original film, with the director/cinematographer very much pushing the style and design. This doesn't work quite as well when sometimes there is not quite the substance to carry it off. How it would work for younger viewers, or those who have never seen the first film, I don't know. But for me it had the style and energy it needed to keep it all moving, but what worked most was that it took that feeling of a backwards looking film, and made that a strength that ran through the 4th wall from the characters out to the production and to the viewer. It is not a match for the original film but it works very well as a companion piece.

garyarmstrong-78424 Was really looking forward to this but the movie just left me feeling utterly let down,bad writing and screenplay shocking really,it wouldnt have been hard to come up with a convincing story with a few laughs but movie was just flat, i give it a generous 2. how on earth it has all these 10 ratings in unbelieveable must be people involved in this turd. lets hope the new bond movie isnt anything like this toilet deposit

andrewrmiddleton Don't be under any doubt that T2 is very underrated as a standalone piece of work. It's a beautifully and inventively shot rush of adrenalin.Robert Carlyle gives another masterful performance as the psychotic, yet ultimately more self-aware, Begbie. Ewan Bremner is also excellent in re-creating the hapless and hilarious Spud. What the movie does extremely well is stay true to and connect with the original, but in a mature and non-convoluted way. Just like the original it opens at a frenetic pace, with Renton sprinting and a high energy track blasting in the background. But this time it's on a treadmill in Amsterdam, to the incessant pounding of the addictive Shotgun Mouthwash. We instantly know and feel that this is the contemporary part of the same universe.If you're familiar with Scotland, you'll also know the significance of the Eastern European greeters at the airport, Sick Boy's Bulgarian prostitute girlfriend, and Renton riding the tram through Haymarket into Edinburgh. Renton is experiencing the changes to the country, for better or worse, since he left 20 years ago.A various points throughout the movie, we flash back to connecting moments from the original, and even to connecting moments from the distant past that we've never seen before but somehow feel we have. Nostalgia is a significant part of the movie, but not in a way which feels forced or tacky. It's about connection to the past, and the characters self-assessing the courses of their lives.Obviously based on the novels Trainspotting and Porno, there isn't a standard movie plot structure. And why should there be? In my view, this would have detracted from what the movie is - a window into the current lives of the characters we know and love, and a sharing with them of their analysis of the courses their lives have taken over the past 20 years and of their insecurities about their legacies.There's a depth and artistry to this movie which would be missed by the ordinary movie-goer. But that's fine. Most people seem to be satisfied with Star Wars rehashes.

iamookay Okay the first film was good one. Then I thought it was unnecessary to make a sequel for it. But someone clarified that it was not made outside the novel to make money. It's indeed adapted from the sequel book of the original film's source. Though coming out 20 years later was the disadvantage. Except some praises it had received, particularly by its hardcore fans, it was average at the box office and I thought same as well. I did not like the story. It was just a random drag, not knowing what direction to head. That's until the third act, and once all the three main characters come together, so it gets interesting with something. Like surviving from from a revenge threat. It was the actors who saved the film. Otherwise, it is not even an average as I consider now. I don't think retaining the title was a good idea, but I think it was just for its fans. Or else, a new title name would have done a decent justice to what it had narrated. As I know, this is the director's first ever sequel and he's not getting better since his Oscar win, a decade ago. Especially the last two flicks, despite based on the very good subjects. Definitely no to the T3. Instead, I want another Oscar nod film from him. This would have been ever worse if somebody else would have made it. Yet, a watchable film, only if you had liked the first. So just think about it before going for it after seeing only positive words from a few people.