‘Miss Congeniality 2: Armed & Fabulous’ (2005)

It has been three weeks since the events in the first film has transpired. In reality, this film came out five years later, which is always impressive when an actor or actress can bounce right back into character. This time around, instead of being undercover, Agent Gracie Hart goes over-cover (if I can say that). She is the new face of the FBI, since everybody can spot her face now. When a group of thugs, headed by Ron Swanson, er, Karl Steele (Nick Offerman) kidnap Miss U.S.A. (Heather Burns) and Stan Fields (William Shatner), it is up to Agent Hart to recover them and save the day.

It’s good to see my original questions being answered in this sequel. Main one being, she was widely recognized by many people as an FBI agent, so how could she possibly go undercover again, and early on in this film has her being made.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

I had a major disappointment while watching this film, which is typically not something that disappoints me, because it is rare for sequels. It was clear that Sandra Bullock still had what it took to bounce back into the same old snorty, clumsy, tomboy-y girl. Then after she is offered the role as the face of the FBI, her entire character, not just personality, changed. She was feminine, she didn’t snort, she was elegant, it just didn’t end. I understand that the film explained it as just another act, but it really needed to keep her character in tact in some way. However, she continued on with another equally enjoyable and humorous character before eventually returning to the same old Gracie that we know and love.

Another minor disappointment presented itself in this sequel. First of all, there is absolutely no beauty pageant throughout the entire film. So it was more about the character and the kidnapping case than a pageant. Sort of understandable, but the pageant was a character in itself as well. There was, however, a similar subplot near the end involving burlesque dancers. Not the same thing as a pageant, but it has the same idea of dressing up as somebody she usually isn’t.

Sequels for the most part tie everything together nice and neat, and it isn’t that this film didn’t, it just had to ignore certain elements of the first. First of all, throughout the first, there was an overall subplot arch involving the brooding romance of Gracie and her partner Eric. They did it in a way that made sense, and then he breaks up with her towards the beginning of this film? In just three weeks? They didn’t even try to explain why. So that’s a major issue with making a sequel take place so soon after the first.

The comedy was still very much in tact. It kept to the same tone as the first, primarily physical humor. While it had some missing elements that probably in all honesty should have carried over, it held it’s own.  I would definitely say that when compared, the first film holds precedence story-wise, but all-in-all they are both pretty enjoyable.

I totally didn’t know where to put this in my review, but in the police station, what was seriously up with the video game for gun training? It’s a police station, they don’t have a real gun training program? Just thought I’d add that in.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “‘Miss Congeniality 2: Armed & Fabulous’ (2005)

    • Haha thanks! Oh and by the way let me give you some incentive to how I rate movies. I kind of go by a rule, as you see the tagline – Sticking up for movies that are bullied – I give credit where credit is due.

      Being an actor myself, I have very little benefits to what real filmmakers do. I love doing what I do, but I get little recognition, so I give every movie equal opportunity, as that is how I would like to be treated. That being said this is how it goes. 1/5 is rare for me, but it means burn it, burn it to the ground, then forget it ever existed. 2/5 means I probably shouldn’t have watched this, I didn’t like it, but it was somewhat watchable. 3/5 means it was okay for a one time viewing, there wasn’t anything really special about it. 4/5 means I had a good time watching it, it’s fun. I wouldn’t mind watching it again. 5/5 means I would love to buy this, I was blown away, like…oh my god.

      Now, comedies are often given the shaft because typically critics like drama, as it showcases an actors talent. It does, don’t get me wrong, but comedy needs to be taken into account too. Give credit where credit is due, and I did laugh in this movie, and I would watch it again. Maybe not right away, but I’m not throwing out the possibility and that’s why I gave it four. Thanks for commenting!

      Like

      • Thanks for explaining your rating system. It’s very good and unique. I don’t dismiss comedies, but I definitely think it’s harder to do a good comedy than to do a good drama, you know. I agree that great comedic actors often go unnoticed because critics tend to prefer drama. I do prefer drama, but can appreciate a fine comedic performance.

        Like

      • No problem, and you know it’s all a matter of personal preference. There is so many different types of comedies it’s ridiculous. Verbal humor, physical, awkward, dark, dry, of course there are dramedies as well. The list goes on. It’s just a preference.

        Like

  1. Pingback: October Roundup – 58 Movies « Dave Examines Movies

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s