MovieChat Forums > Johnny English Reborn (2011) Discussion > Johnny English Reborn is a good example ...

Johnny English Reborn is a good example of the sequel being better.

posted 12 years ago by iroquoisjoe
8 replies | jump to latest

1) The main reason I love this second film is because it allows Rowan Atkinson to show Johnny English developing into a better MAN. The first he was sort of like Mr. Bean gets his chance to be a spy...which was great and enjoyable but wore on towards the end. Now you get to see him not only as a veteran agent who STILL has to adapt to be BETTER. I like this character more. He seems more real and relatable to me. Maybe I see myself in him more. His having to deal with women bosses/technicians, having to teach a new partner, and his agency becoming more political and less of just the old boys club of the past allows the film to become more film of the 21st century instead of just a spoof of the 60's spy genre.

2) The co-stars/side-characters were better. The love interest was more interesting and had a better face/body. She seemed more believable also. The new female Pegasus was great. The top agent was good in how his upper-crusty manner was used as a good contrast to English... and how Engilsh reveres his senior for his aristocraticness and how that comes to bit him in the end is great. I like the new young enthusiastic partner. I like the way English reminds him when he quits that UK is also HIS (the partner's) country to defend also.

3) The action, vehicles (car and helicopter), technology, and fights are better. Most important...they combine all this "spy film" type stuff WITH the comedy without taking away from one or the other.

4) The comedy itself was well thought-out and had me laughing more often. For example the scene where his boss gets mad at him and he has to respond to her after taking the voice changing lozenge still makes me crack up. I mean it is like two jokes in one. AT first you are thinking his voice went high because she verbally castrated him in front of the tech boys...which is silly enough but then you realize he had accidentally taken that silly piece of spy-tech that really works..but was not quite ready yet.

[–] ActionJunkie007 12 years ago

I couldnt agree more. It was just a better all around film. The only thing that bugged me was the whole "training in Asia" thing...seen it too many times in sequels for other comedies but I enjoyed it. Im a huge fan of Rowan and I always find myself enjoying his films/tv shows.

[–] iroquoisjoe 11 years ago

I couldnt agree more. It was just a better all around film.

Yeah! From start to finish this film gave you a little bit...more somehow. I noticed even the sets seemed better this time around...for example the love-interests apartment and the experimental gadgets/weapons lab.

The only thing that bugged me was the whole "training in Asia" thing...seen it too many times in sequels for other comedies but I enjoyed it.

I've seen it done a FEW times, but I can except any rehas in a comedy as long as it's FUNNY. And...yeah...Rowan delivers, of course, bringing his inimitable version of how that sort of 'getting-training-from-the-martial-arts-masters' thing would go with a guy like Johnny English.

On November 6, 2012...God blessed America

[–] scrardft 12 years ago

Yes, yes, yes, yes. I knew I wasn't alone thinking the voice changing travel lozanges part was the funniest of them all.

[–] j_w_pepper 11 years ago

I also agree. I watched both of the movies on two consecutive nights for the first time after finally having bought a double-feature Blu-ray cheaply. I always put this off because frankly, I can't stand Mr Bean (for heaven's sake, he's just not funny!) and also think Rowan Atkinson's character Nigel Small-Fawcett is the worst thing about NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN. Which does mean something.

I was pleasantly surprised by both of the Johnny English movies in that they are both enjoyable, in a sort of brain-dead, popcorn, what-the-hell sort of way. But REBORN was clearly the better of the two (in spite of John Malkovich in the first)...and I guess mainly because in the second movie JE was considerably less of an idiot Mr Bean clone.

Marlowe had said 15 years ago: Dead men don't wear plaid. I still don't know what it means.

[–] yusef-ghanima 11 years ago

you turned things upside down, because there is no way that this is better than the first and your own points prove it.

1 this is a comedy, what makes it funny is a character like mr bean, as for johnny english develope to a better man that is exactly not funny which make it a worse comedy, you look for drama you don't look for it in johnny english.

2 here you look for a romantic movie not a comedy, you still don't get it and judge things with your dick like most men do.

3 this is exactly what make this part worse, the director forgot that he's making a spy spoof and thought that he's making a real james bond movie, which is not funny hence a worse comedy.

4 the comedy which is the most important point but you give it no 4 is very funny sometimes but much less than the first movie, because instead of focusing on comedy they wasted time on drama, romance and action!!

[–] avortac4 (3770) 3 years ago

"here you look for a romantic movie not a comedy, you still don't get it and judge things with your dick like most men do."

Could you BE more confused and misandristic?

First of all, how do you know what most men do, and why would you obsess with gender so much you use it to insult 50% of the population of a whole planet?

Secondly, romance has nothing to do with male genitalia - if anything, romance exists EXACTLY because women love it and can't live without it. A woman I knew reviewed The Matrix like this: "Not enough romance". Should I say most women judge things with their cúnt?

I have always thought AND said in these boards and forums that I HATE injected romance, I don't think any movie should have romance beyond 'chick flicks', and that at the very least, EVERY movie shouldn't have romance any more than EVERY movie has to have square dancing; to me, it's just as crazy.

Men don't generally like romance, if you want to make a blatant, below-the-belt ad hominen-style accusation (because you don't have a real argument), at least point to something like boobies and erotic scenes for 'thinking with your dick', not ROMANCE of all things. Romance is BORING to men.

However, MY stance on erotic and boobie-scenes is that it's EXPLOITATION of men, keeping men horny serves women in this matriarchal world, because horny men are willing to do anything for women. If you want to accuse men like that, take into account that movies TRY to make men think with their dicks because movies try to keep men in a permanent state of sexual arousal, because that makes it harder for men to think, and easier for women to control men and make men do their bidding.

Isn't this a nice catch-22? First movies keep men aroused, which leads to men being controlled, and as an added bonus it gives toxic cretins like you the opportunity to unfairly and baselessly insult men for then 'thinking with their dick' or 'judging things with their dick'.

Men can't win..

[–] mikko-sandt 11 years ago

The first one was pretty bad, this one was really bad. I chuckled once.

It could have been worse though. It could have been embarrassingly bad, like Disaster Movie.

[–] geearf 10 years ago

I personally liked the first one more:

- his sidekick was funnier
- he made more funny mistakes
- his relationship with Imbruglia, seemed more interesting (even if unbelievable)

and the 2nd movie dropped many parts of the first one:
- He was appointed King of England, there is no way that he is not already THE most known MI7 agent (which should be a big NO to remain an agent anyway) yet in this one Simon says that he will be the most known agent after killing the Premier...
- All the agents were killed, that's why he became an agent, he should have seniority over everyone in the 2nd movie, but it doesn't really reflect so.
- English is supposed to be even smarter than in the 1st movie after his training, yet in the 1st movie he right away saw who the culprit was, but in this one, even after Tuckers proves it, he cannot...

(The villain was better of course in the 2nd movie, but not funny at all...)