the audience applauded

So much average

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.

It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

I feel terrible for not watching the original "Blues Brothers" film seeing as how popular it is. There are too many mistakes to list in this movie, but the first and foremost is the title. Why is it called "Blues Brothers 2000" when it was released in 1998? Couldn't they even get that right? This movie features this new kid character being introduced and he does practically nothing for the entire movie except steal a guy's wallet. That's really it. Now I will give it credit for having pretty good music in it. The songs are surprisingly catchy.The main flaw is that half of the original cast is gone. There's no setup or tension because the orphanage from the first film was closed down. The only good scene is when they show the cars pile up. Even that isn't very rewarding because you're expecting something to surpass that at the very end but instead it amounts to literally nothing. I feel this movie could have ended at the 90 minute mark. Instead, they just continue it with more stupidity like people being turned into rats! *1/2

1980s Blues Brother was perhaps the greatest Saturday Night Live skit to spin off from the show into the realm of movies. Still, The Blues Brothers wasn't the perfect movie to be made. It was a nightmare for Universal Pictures, to complete. It was wildly off schedule, had an ever-changing script, drug-fuel stars and was way over budget. Yet, the movie made, nearly triple of its money back, when it was released. The reasons why it work, was because the movie was action packed, kinda funny, and had great musical numbers. Still, most of its success, came from its two top drawings stars, Dan Akroyd and John Belushi. This sequel, didn't have any of those achievements. It's felt like a desperate retread between writer/actor Dan Akyroyd and writer/director John Landis to relive the glory days. The sequel fails to live up to the original, big time. The reasons why, are very clear. First off, the movie plot is paper thin. The movie tells the story of Elwood Blue (Dan Aykroyd) trying to reunited the old band to fight in a battle of the band contest in Louisiana. In my opinion, this plot is very weak, compare to the "Mission from God," from the first movie. The movie never establish, why Elwood need the band, in the first place, or why the other band members would come to his rescue, when they, themselves are living, pretty well-off. Second off, the movie kinda ruins the first film, by stating out that the orphanage that the brothers were trying to save, ended up, closing. It kinda a bummer opening to a film. The Studio didn't like this, and force John Landis to make the rest of the film, more light-hearted. It gets worst, as the film turns PG to capitalize on a wider audience. It really limits the amount of violent and language, that they can show. This makes for a very underwhelming film. It was really boring for the most part. The jokes are very childish and cartoony. I really couldn't get into the whole, over the top supernatural sequence, this movie, brings. It felt like a 10 year old, wrote this film. I really didn't like the fact, that Elwood was being team up with a kid named Buster (J. Evan Bonifant). Not once, in the film does Elwood seem like he has any father-like connection with the kid. The movie acts as if the kid wasn't there, for the most part. It was very pointless. Even new members, like Mack (John Goodman) were underwhelming. The movie never does a good job, in making it seem, like Elwood and Mack have somewhat a connection. The chemistry, between them isn't there. It's sad, because I love John Goodman as an actor. John Landis and Dan Aykroyd were reportedly very unhappy with the changes the studio forced onto the film, even coming close to quitting the project. Third off, I can't believe, they made a sequel, 18 years after the 1980's hit, Blues Brothers. John Landis really waited too long to get this sequel, off the ground. Nobody really wanted to see this film, in the late 1990s. Why is this movie, even made!? It's not like, the fan-base were asking for a Blues Brothers sequel. If, they were; clearly the producers should had quickly capitalize on it, in the early 1980s. Maybe, they did, wanted to make a film sequel as quick as possible, but production of the film was halted, due to main actor, John Belushi's odd drug behavior. Maybe, they were waiting for Belushi to go into rehab. Well, that day never came, as John Belushi died in 1982. Since Belushi couldn't reprise his role, I don't understand, why this movie wasn't shelf. Clearly, they can't use a "double" for Jake. Nobody can double Belushi. The death was actually worked into the film's plot; it didn't really help, but it was at least respectful to John Belushi. The film was originally intended to include Brother Zee Blues (Jim Belushi, brother of John Belushi). But due to an already existing television deal, Jim Belushi was unable to appear and the script was altered to include Cab Blues (Joe Morton). This was a huge mistake as Joe Morton, really didn't give us, much in humor. He's a good actor, but he's no comedian. The movie has a lot of cameos by celebs. Aretha Franklin, B.B King, James Brown, Frank Oz and few others return from the first movie, for a small paycheck and reprise some of their classic hits. One person from the first movie that didn't return was Cab Calloway & John Candy, who died four years prior to the film's release. Still, the movie does give them, some homage. I like that new musicians at the time, like Blues Travelers & Erykah Badu, gives the movie, so needed new flair. It made the film, somewhat entertaining. The music is pretty damn good for the most part, but the movie doesn't mixed, the musical sequences so well, with the rest of the film. Overall: This movie is one of most pointless, underwhelming, and just downright bizarre sequels in comedy history. It wasn't good, man. I don't recommended.

I'm a huge fan of the first movie. Love the music & the acting & overall pace of the first movie. I went into BB2k with an open mind knowing it got bad reviews & for the most part was not good. I was quite pleasantly surprised. If you go into this movie expecting a huge sequel, you will be disappointed. I wasn't expecting a huge sequel. I was expecting exactly what I got. A fun movie. I liked the music, not as much as the original, but it was still fun music. High action and a lot of funny scenes that I rewound several times to watch again. Lots of guest stars you have to pay close mind to and I caught myself remembering each older band member as they were back in the 80's. Thinner, less or no grey hair and more involved with the movie instead of just being "The Band". They tried to relive scenes from the original that, although not done well, I saw what they did there. The acting is on par with this kind of movie. I didn't expect Brando or anything like that. I expected exactly what was delivered. And to read that Akroyd & Landis were forced to make the movie in a way that did not suit them, only the execs, tells me that although the movie could have been better, their hands were tied & they did the absolute best they could.I gave the movie a 8 out of 10 stars. Subtract one star because you don't know what happened to Jake. Although really not important to the movie plot, it would be nice to know.Subtract one more star, "for general purpose". I don't believe in 10 out of 10 stars in movies. At least not yet.So go in watching this movie with an open mind and know they are just trying to ride the wave that is called "movie sequels". When it came out in 1998...even then I knew it wouldn't do well. But yet I still enjoyed the movie thoroughly.

See my title? Now that is a really poor joke, but I hate to say still better and more amusing than this film. I have put this review may contain spoilers, but I am not sure how I can really spoil something so appalling.Music, yes it has music and it is OK. I was most fascinated to hear a hyped up Gospel rendition of "John the Revelator" a much beloved tune for me from The Sons of Anarchy.Does the Blue Brothers 2000 have a plot? Not that I noticed, it seemed to be mostly a vehicle to fit in as many possible cameo performances from The Blues Brothers.If you look at the full cast list and see that they managed to destroy 1 more car than the original Blues Brothers film you have to ask this question; Was someone at studio production stone deaf and at a business lunch misunderstood a conversation in which they thought someone said "The Blues Brothers were great too..." to which they said "Yes...." and then thought they were signing for lunch? It is said that this film lost $14 Million. I'm shocked the loss was really that small.