T2 Trainspotting
T2 Trainspotting
R | 31 March 2017 (USA)
T2 Trainspotting Trailers

After 20 years abroad, Mark Renton returns to Scotland and reunites with his old friends Sick Boy, Spud and Begbie.

Reviews
Bardlerx Strictly average movie
TeenzTen An action-packed slog
Breakinger A Brilliant Conflict
Kamila Bell This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.
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
tubezzz The first 30-40 minutes of the movie were perfect. everyone is back, the scenes are funny and promising, and the nostalgia kicks in and makes you fall in love with the cast all over again.Sadly, after 30+ minutes, it feels like they literally lost the script, and had to come up with the story on the spot. the momentum is gone and so is the excitement. the story is just not good enough.
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.