Tom makes this film, and it is a decent late night film that was intended to a b film, What surprised me was the budget, what the US dollar can get in Hugary. I mean they got tank, choppers, lots of troops, and a believable military actors. This is still a B movie, but watchable. PS they leave room for Sniper 3 with the ending. It was a power one. 6/10
64 Reviews
Still watchable but nothing like the original
breakdownthatfilm-blogspot-com30 July 2012
The first Sniper film starring Tom Berenger and Billy Zane was one heck of movie. And I wasn't surprised when I discovered that Sniper had its own set of sequels. Thankfully, for this franchise, just because they are Direct-to-Video sequels doesn't mean the writers left out what happened from the first film. Sniper 2 does retain some good qualities but it lacks a lot of what made Sniper (1993) the best.
Tom Berenger is back as the intelligent and deadly marksmen, Thomas Beckett. After having a frustrating retired life, he's persuaded to take on another mission by the U.S. government. This time, it's to take out a leader named Valstoria in Europe. It's great to see Berenger playing Beckett again because who else could? Berenger has a way of making his character cool and smart at the same time. Accompanying Beckett is Cole played by Bokeem Woodbine. Woodbine's character is arrogant and by listening to him talk rudely to Beckett just didn't seem like a good match. Zane's character, Richard Miller. was arrogant too but in a different manner; he had no experience being a sniper.
Something that really throws this film off track is the location. The first Sniper film took place in Panama. Dense heavy jungle, where every bit of the soldier had to be covered in camouflage. The location here is the middle of a city. There's no room for this now. Making things even more off beat is how this sequel turned itself into an actioneer film. There's absolutely no hint of thriller genre in the running time. As Beckett said originally from the first film:
"We'll wait days, for one shot one kill."
There's no extended waiting time here. It's "On your mark, get set, go". Several cars blow up, multiple gunfights, and lots of explosions. Sure it's a different angle but there's nothing to be thrilled about anymore. The explosions do the job. All the audience has to do now is leave their brains at the door. Why make such a successful first film and then turn it into a brain-dead action franchise? Thriller films engage their audiences, but not like this. I did enjoy it to a certain extent but I wasn't enthralled by it.
Then there's the whole issue of Beckett not understanding what the Europeans are speaking. How come he doesn't know? Beckett's the smart one! Why does he have to play Zane's role in this film and be the one who's always behind the eight ball? It's almost like he took a back seat for this film. One thing that made me a bit happy was knowing that Gary Chang was back again to make the score to this sequel. It wasn't totally the same as before but it at least tried to recall the elements of the first movie to show its resemblance.
Sniper 2 is not the best sequel even with Tom Berenger and Gary Chang reprising their roles. The story is at least faithful to the first film but nothing else is truly memorable about it.
Tom Berenger is back as the intelligent and deadly marksmen, Thomas Beckett. After having a frustrating retired life, he's persuaded to take on another mission by the U.S. government. This time, it's to take out a leader named Valstoria in Europe. It's great to see Berenger playing Beckett again because who else could? Berenger has a way of making his character cool and smart at the same time. Accompanying Beckett is Cole played by Bokeem Woodbine. Woodbine's character is arrogant and by listening to him talk rudely to Beckett just didn't seem like a good match. Zane's character, Richard Miller. was arrogant too but in a different manner; he had no experience being a sniper.
Something that really throws this film off track is the location. The first Sniper film took place in Panama. Dense heavy jungle, where every bit of the soldier had to be covered in camouflage. The location here is the middle of a city. There's no room for this now. Making things even more off beat is how this sequel turned itself into an actioneer film. There's absolutely no hint of thriller genre in the running time. As Beckett said originally from the first film:
"We'll wait days, for one shot one kill."
There's no extended waiting time here. It's "On your mark, get set, go". Several cars blow up, multiple gunfights, and lots of explosions. Sure it's a different angle but there's nothing to be thrilled about anymore. The explosions do the job. All the audience has to do now is leave their brains at the door. Why make such a successful first film and then turn it into a brain-dead action franchise? Thriller films engage their audiences, but not like this. I did enjoy it to a certain extent but I wasn't enthralled by it.
Then there's the whole issue of Beckett not understanding what the Europeans are speaking. How come he doesn't know? Beckett's the smart one! Why does he have to play Zane's role in this film and be the one who's always behind the eight ball? It's almost like he took a back seat for this film. One thing that made me a bit happy was knowing that Gary Chang was back again to make the score to this sequel. It wasn't totally the same as before but it at least tried to recall the elements of the first movie to show its resemblance.
Sniper 2 is not the best sequel even with Tom Berenger and Gary Chang reprising their roles. The story is at least faithful to the first film but nothing else is truly memorable about it.
Berenger is good, but action and story are pretty routine.
a_chinn22 November 2017
Direct-to-video sequel almost 10 years after the original is buoyed by a strong performance from Tom Berenger, returning as the titular sniper, and solid action direction form Craig R. Baxley, who directed the underrated "I Come in Peace." Berenger's Marine sniper character is now retired, but is called back for a CIA covert op and is once again saddled with a young know-it-all sniper, this time Bokeem Woodbine instead of Billy Zane. As you might expect, the mission ends up being more than Berenger bargained for, but it's nothing all that clever or interesting. As with the first film, the story is the weak point, though this film was minus the first film's focus on stealth and suspense and instead focuses on standard action film pyrotechnics and mayhem, which isn't bad but isn't as unique as the first film. The extended sequence in the original film of Berenger and Zane getting into position to take out a target was unique and a lot of fun. Overall, "Sniper 2" isn't terrible, but it's nothing to go out of your way to watch. Gary Chang provided the film's score.
Geography???
Iztok_smogavc20 February 2005
I just watched this movie. Firstly, movie is not near as good as Sniper 1. And secondly some words about this so called Serbian fighters. I'm from Slovenia and I speak Serbian language. But in this movie I didn't understand not even one word. At the end of the movie I saw this list of actors. Those names are not Serbian but Hungarian. I don't know who (I know only that he's mind doesn't work as it should) said to director of this movie that Hungary and Serbia is one and the same country. Language, habits, mentality,
nothing is the same in these two countries. It's very sad that someone is making a movie about country and he doesn't even knows basics about this country. Movie quality: 3/10 Geography knowledge: 0/10
How to make a pitiful and grotesque comedy out of an action movie
pese-22 May 2009
Yes, it's not a historical drama, but credibility about the milieu is a must even for action movies, otherwise they may easily get ridiculous, like this one.
1. Hungary is (was) a neighbor to ex-Yugoslavia, but never part of it. So Hungary was also absolutely out of the ethnic conflicts and remained greatly neutral throughout.
2. We should imagine the whole movie happens in Serbia (the biggest of the successor-states of ex-Yugoslavia), however, everybody talks Hungarian, which doesn't even sound alike. (Serbian language belongs to the Slavic group of Indo-European family of languages, while Hungarian belongs to the Finno-Ugric group of Ural-Altaic family. Different grammar, different pronunciation, different intonation, different rhythm, not a word in common). It may not matter for the Americans, but Eastern Europe (even tens of millions in Western Europe) clearly understand the difference.
2/a. On top of this, the written Serbian is using Cyrillic letters, while Hungarian is using Latin letters (with certain vowels bearing special accents). Whatever is written in the street scenes of the movie - e.g. the "Szent Erzsébet" (Saint Elizabeth)statue in front of the cathedral - is written in Latin letters in Hungarian language.
3. The Serbians are basically orthodox catholic by majority, while the Hungarians are basically Roman catholic. The cathedral bearing a central role in the movie has no connection to anything in a typical orthodox church in Serbia.
4. All cars in the streets bear Hungarian license plates, showing the country code (H) and Hungary's national flag left of the 3-letter/3-digit combination of license plates.
4/a. All military vehicles in the movie have Hungarian military license plates.
5. To make a street scene, which the movie-makers believed as typical, they collected and showed all kinds of lousy Eastern-European cars (even including the infamous Polish van called Zuk), but no Western cars even by mistake. Such street picture was typical in Hungary up to the early 80s and in Yugoslavia up to mid-70s, whilst the story is happening in late-90s.
5/a Only one car does not appear in the whole movie: the Yugoslavian-made Zastava, the newer models of which were still in quite a quantity in the streets of Serbia in the late-90s.
6. The Serbian police cars, which are hit and blown by the tram in the movie, are all of East-German-made Wartburgs (3-cylinder/2-stroke engine). Yugoslavian/Serbian police never had a Wartburg (unless a few sample/test cars, which I may not know). The typical Yugoslavian police car was locally built Zastava (originally Fiat-based cars), but in the late-90s (when the story is played) there were already hundreds of thousands of Western cars in Yugoslavia and even the police had many.
7. The tram-cars are of Hungarian-built UV models, never exported to any country (not even to Yugoslavia) and they have Hungarian route-boards installed on their noses.
You don't need to make a historical drama to be correct about elementary basics like geography, era and ethnography of your story and not to mix up everything into a terrible and greatly stereotyped mess. Being a European, it doesn't matter what is happening in the movie, you don't know whether to laugh or to cry as it is completely impossible to empathize the story under such visual and verbal circumstances.
When we make a movie which story is playing in New York, we don't show agave fields instead of Central Square with people in sombreros, eating chili con carne and taco in the streets and drinking tequila in the bars, even though Mexico is the neighboring country to the USA. So the American makers may have believed the whole world is completely stupid and believes what they think a stereotyped Eastern Europe should be, however, for us living in this region, it is like a direct insult. So I believe it is a big mistake to play this movie in European TV channels (it is also a mistake to play it in the rest of the world because it is misleading people and don't give any realistic background about real Serbian milieu, but at least non-Europeans don't know all those mistakes).
Finally, compare this cheap lousy nonsense with Evita, the street scenes of which were also filmed in the streets of Budapest instead of Buenos Aires, but you cannot catch it because all details properly fit.
Big shame on the producers of Sniper-2 !!!
1. Hungary is (was) a neighbor to ex-Yugoslavia, but never part of it. So Hungary was also absolutely out of the ethnic conflicts and remained greatly neutral throughout.
2. We should imagine the whole movie happens in Serbia (the biggest of the successor-states of ex-Yugoslavia), however, everybody talks Hungarian, which doesn't even sound alike. (Serbian language belongs to the Slavic group of Indo-European family of languages, while Hungarian belongs to the Finno-Ugric group of Ural-Altaic family. Different grammar, different pronunciation, different intonation, different rhythm, not a word in common). It may not matter for the Americans, but Eastern Europe (even tens of millions in Western Europe) clearly understand the difference.
2/a. On top of this, the written Serbian is using Cyrillic letters, while Hungarian is using Latin letters (with certain vowels bearing special accents). Whatever is written in the street scenes of the movie - e.g. the "Szent Erzsébet" (Saint Elizabeth)statue in front of the cathedral - is written in Latin letters in Hungarian language.
3. The Serbians are basically orthodox catholic by majority, while the Hungarians are basically Roman catholic. The cathedral bearing a central role in the movie has no connection to anything in a typical orthodox church in Serbia.
4. All cars in the streets bear Hungarian license plates, showing the country code (H) and Hungary's national flag left of the 3-letter/3-digit combination of license plates.
4/a. All military vehicles in the movie have Hungarian military license plates.
5. To make a street scene, which the movie-makers believed as typical, they collected and showed all kinds of lousy Eastern-European cars (even including the infamous Polish van called Zuk), but no Western cars even by mistake. Such street picture was typical in Hungary up to the early 80s and in Yugoslavia up to mid-70s, whilst the story is happening in late-90s.
5/a Only one car does not appear in the whole movie: the Yugoslavian-made Zastava, the newer models of which were still in quite a quantity in the streets of Serbia in the late-90s.
6. The Serbian police cars, which are hit and blown by the tram in the movie, are all of East-German-made Wartburgs (3-cylinder/2-stroke engine). Yugoslavian/Serbian police never had a Wartburg (unless a few sample/test cars, which I may not know). The typical Yugoslavian police car was locally built Zastava (originally Fiat-based cars), but in the late-90s (when the story is played) there were already hundreds of thousands of Western cars in Yugoslavia and even the police had many.
7. The tram-cars are of Hungarian-built UV models, never exported to any country (not even to Yugoslavia) and they have Hungarian route-boards installed on their noses.
You don't need to make a historical drama to be correct about elementary basics like geography, era and ethnography of your story and not to mix up everything into a terrible and greatly stereotyped mess. Being a European, it doesn't matter what is happening in the movie, you don't know whether to laugh or to cry as it is completely impossible to empathize the story under such visual and verbal circumstances.
When we make a movie which story is playing in New York, we don't show agave fields instead of Central Square with people in sombreros, eating chili con carne and taco in the streets and drinking tequila in the bars, even though Mexico is the neighboring country to the USA. So the American makers may have believed the whole world is completely stupid and believes what they think a stereotyped Eastern Europe should be, however, for us living in this region, it is like a direct insult. So I believe it is a big mistake to play this movie in European TV channels (it is also a mistake to play it in the rest of the world because it is misleading people and don't give any realistic background about real Serbian milieu, but at least non-Europeans don't know all those mistakes).
Finally, compare this cheap lousy nonsense with Evita, the street scenes of which were also filmed in the streets of Budapest instead of Buenos Aires, but you cannot catch it because all details properly fit.
Big shame on the producers of Sniper-2 !!!
give me my life back !!!
pavor nocturnus5 April 2006
After renting this movie by mistake, I said to myself 'how bad can it be, I'll just sit tight and give it a try'. My dear Lord, what a mistake. I am a war movie buff myself, and I can swallow a lot of inconsistency, dumb dialogue, poor acting, thin plot and lousy sets, but this was way below the threshold. This movie was full of each, and than some. Tom Berenger is at the age when he should be enjoying his retirement benefits in Florida. Who was he fighting at the end - Hungarians, Serbs, Muslims? I know that, by now proverbial bad guys, the Serbs (which itself tells you how 'cliche' the plot was) were the target, but they ended up speaking the Hungarian, and this in a scenery that screams 'This Be Happening in Hungary'. For God's sake, do you think that the viewers are so uneducated. I could continue ranting, but the main point is, don't waste your time as I did with mine. Mr. Smith gives it 1/10, only because there is no 0 rating.
The Mauser Rifle that wasn't! But still a Good Flick!
claypipe25 January 2003
I found this movie well thought out and for the most part well executed. However, it most glaring flaw was with its technical aspects. In the scene, where the underground partisan, Sophia, brings Sgt. Beckett beneath a tavern, to a store of WWII arms. Sgt. Beckett picks up a rifle and calling it a German 8mm Mauser. But in reality it is a Russian 7.62 Mosin Nagant, to which he adds the proper Russian sniper scope and mount. I was very surprised at this and wonder who was at fault. But otherwise, I felt this film is another success for Tom Berenger.
Perfectly adequate sequel
lacrescenta1 April 2003
I liked the first "Sniper" movie and especially liked Becker (played by Tom Berenger). He's a solemn and sometimes grumpy sniper who bickers and argues (but also looks after) anyone he's partnered with on a mission. I saw the original film as more of a `character study' of this solitary Becker character, and was not disappointed that the sequel was mostly a character study as well. Though of course there is plenty of action and suspense as well!
"Sniper 2" re-works the same formula as the first film, but with some differences. Becker is a little older, but he's still grumpy (but protective) as ever. The guy he's partnered up with in this film is different than the somewhat green and annoying Billy Zane character in the first film. I liked this new guy pretty well.
And I liked seeing Becker again. I'd grown fond of Becker in the first film, and I thought the sequel held up well. Sure, it could have been better, but really, it was not bad at all. It's a solid film--not earth-shatteringly great, but if you enjoyed the way the first movie went, and especially enjoyed the characters, then you'll like this film.
"Sniper 2" re-works the same formula as the first film, but with some differences. Becker is a little older, but he's still grumpy (but protective) as ever. The guy he's partnered up with in this film is different than the somewhat green and annoying Billy Zane character in the first film. I liked this new guy pretty well.
And I liked seeing Becker again. I'd grown fond of Becker in the first film, and I thought the sequel held up well. Sure, it could have been better, but really, it was not bad at all. It's a solid film--not earth-shatteringly great, but if you enjoyed the way the first movie went, and especially enjoyed the characters, then you'll like this film.
Director should have looked at the atlas and history book
mvrekic26 January 2008
In this directors world, Serbs speak Hungarian, Budapest is capital of Serbia and Muslims have been living in eastern Europe for 600 years.
Nazis and Communists are killing Muslims in the Eastern Europe LMFAO! Acting does not exist.
Ed Wood's "Plan 9 from outer space" has nothing on this movie. This is stupidity at it's best made by and for the Average Joe; so he has something "easy-on-the-brain" to watch when he comes home from working at the burger shack.
I am putting this as the second worst movie i have ever seen, first one being the "Dracula 3000".
Nazis and Communists are killing Muslims in the Eastern Europe LMFAO! Acting does not exist.
Ed Wood's "Plan 9 from outer space" has nothing on this movie. This is stupidity at it's best made by and for the Average Joe; so he has something "easy-on-the-brain" to watch when he comes home from working at the burger shack.
I am putting this as the second worst movie i have ever seen, first one being the "Dracula 3000".
Surprisingly good
ODDBear12 February 2006
Ex-Marine sniper Thomas Beckett is lured out of retirement for an assignment in the Balkans and he's teamed up with a death row inmate.
As far as TV sequels go, this is pretty decent. Although the character of Beckett isn't expanded on the film does have a solid story with a good twist which kept me intrigued for the most part. Action sequences are fairly good compared to many other TV movies and director's choirs are mostly well handled by a director who made big budget films in his prime.
Tom Berenger owns the part of Beckett and does well as always and the rest of the cast do good as well. Sniper 2 surprised me somewhat as it proved to be quite entertaining and not far behind the original.
As far as TV sequels go, this is pretty decent. Although the character of Beckett isn't expanded on the film does have a solid story with a good twist which kept me intrigued for the most part. Action sequences are fairly good compared to many other TV movies and director's choirs are mostly well handled by a director who made big budget films in his prime.
Tom Berenger owns the part of Beckett and does well as always and the rest of the cast do good as well. Sniper 2 surprised me somewhat as it proved to be quite entertaining and not far behind the original.
how low can you go...
njoco9 January 2008
The whole crew should look for a different job. It can't be worse than this. The whole movie doesn't make any sense. It's just a random pick of different "anti-American" nations who need uncle Sam to come and spank each till they reason themselves. The “bad” guys are the Serbs but no one in the movie speaks any Serbian. The resistance is supposed to be Muslims who fight the Serbs but their names are very much Christian. Also it always seems that Russian tanks make more noise than damage…how is it possible to miss 5 people from 20 yards shooting from a tank? I can go forever like this but the movie is not worth it. Don't waste your time with it.
Marine sniper Thomas Beckett returns to action to kill a rouge general
Tomnari29 December 2002
Sniper 2 is the sequel to the 1993 film SNIPER, both starring Tom Berenger. In this installment Beckett (Berenger) has been drummed out of the marines due to the finger he lost in the first film (I had to go back and see if that happened -- it did). He's down on his luck and getting by as a hunting guide and by winning sniper competitions when the government contacts him. They will give him anything to return to action and kill a rouge Eastern European general. Beckett's "anything" turns out to be his uniform and rank returned. He is then hooked up with Cole (Bookim Woodbine) and dropped in enemy territory. The mission goes well, Beckett kills his mark but then things take a terrible twist. The rest of the film is a rather exciting adventure where things are not what they seem to be.
I found this film on Cinemax and really enjoyed it. Great action from the first to the last frame. Berenger looks great and reprises his role with class. Woodbine is a bit smug at first like he's enjoying a joke we don't get, but he gets better as the film goes on. The twist is very clever and I never saw it coming. As I said I watched the original after I saw this installment and will vouch that the sequel is far better. It's non-stop action with a couple of great lines.
I found this film on Cinemax and really enjoyed it. Great action from the first to the last frame. Berenger looks great and reprises his role with class. Woodbine is a bit smug at first like he's enjoying a joke we don't get, but he gets better as the film goes on. The twist is very clever and I never saw it coming. As I said I watched the original after I saw this installment and will vouch that the sequel is far better. It's non-stop action with a couple of great lines.
A good sequel...
paul_haakonsen9 August 2022
Sitting down to watch the 2002 movie "Sniper 2" after having just watched the 1993 original movie, I must say that writers Ron Mita and Jim McClain actually managed to put together an entertaining and enjoyable storyline for this particular movie.
While "Sniper 2" doesn't take place in a jungle, as the first movie did, I will say that the storyline sure was interesting enough. And it was a nice change of pace to have Thomas Beckett (played by Tom Berenger) do what he does in an urban setting.
There is a good amount of action in the movie, which supplements the storyline quite well. So the 91 minutes runtime doesn't feel long, slow or boring. I was genuinely entertained by this 2002 sequel from director Craig R. Baxley.
So this is definitely one of those rare moments where the sequel is every bit as good as the original first movie. If you enjoyed the 1993 movie "Sniper", then you definitely should also watch the 2002 movie "Sniper 2". This was my second time of watching it since it was initially released.
My rating of "Sniper 2" lands on a six out of ten stars.
While "Sniper 2" doesn't take place in a jungle, as the first movie did, I will say that the storyline sure was interesting enough. And it was a nice change of pace to have Thomas Beckett (played by Tom Berenger) do what he does in an urban setting.
There is a good amount of action in the movie, which supplements the storyline quite well. So the 91 minutes runtime doesn't feel long, slow or boring. I was genuinely entertained by this 2002 sequel from director Craig R. Baxley.
So this is definitely one of those rare moments where the sequel is every bit as good as the original first movie. If you enjoyed the 1993 movie "Sniper", then you definitely should also watch the 2002 movie "Sniper 2". This was my second time of watching it since it was initially released.
My rating of "Sniper 2" lands on a six out of ten stars.
Will go down in the annals of history as one of the worst scam jobs ever
ger_god19 March 2005
Great movie, apparently, Hungarian actors are cheaper than Serbian actors. It was interesting to see how many Hungarians there are living in Serbia and working for the Serbian cause and Serbian army.This movie was horrendous and probably cost less to make than some home movie porno. I can't believe they tried to pass off Hungarians as Serbians. People who actually think this movie was good are probably such hicks they don't know the difference, "eh, look its all eastern Europe to me." I have an idea, they should make a movie called "Bucharest, a documentary" and film the whole movie in Budapest. Also, Sniper 3 can take place in China with a bunch of Japanese actors, or better yet, whey not just do it India and have native American actors.
Put your mind on hold, and let Tom Berenger in!
anthimus_k19 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Tom Berenger is back! on a new secret mission to snipe a Serbian general who is responsible for ethnical cleaning towards Muslim people.
Very Mild Story Spoiler:
Tom Berenger who is out of the army gets a visit of CIA officer and a millitary captain, to discuss about a "suicide" mission. Tom easily admits YEAH! " if i want to die, i want to die as a soldier" looool :-), he wants his former military rank back "in return" Tom requests for a backup "Bokeem Woodbine aka Cole" comes and joins Berengers one man platoon. After that they will be dropped within enemy lines. And the rest will is for your eyes only!
I feel sniper 2 is worthy sequel, ok we don't have Billy Zane anymore but Bokeem Woodbine "Cole" performed pretty well.
If you can't enjoy a movie like Sniper 2 you can't shutdown your brain, and you shouldn't watch a movie like this in the first place for "the criticism".
Call me a cheater but Berenger deserve some respect as B actor, therefore i rate it: 7/10 Hopefully we will see him back in Sniper 3 "that would be something" :)
All and All.... Cool Berenger Movie!
Cheers
Very Mild Story Spoiler:
Tom Berenger who is out of the army gets a visit of CIA officer and a millitary captain, to discuss about a "suicide" mission. Tom easily admits YEAH! " if i want to die, i want to die as a soldier" looool :-), he wants his former military rank back "in return" Tom requests for a backup "Bokeem Woodbine aka Cole" comes and joins Berengers one man platoon. After that they will be dropped within enemy lines. And the rest will is for your eyes only!
I feel sniper 2 is worthy sequel, ok we don't have Billy Zane anymore but Bokeem Woodbine "Cole" performed pretty well.
If you can't enjoy a movie like Sniper 2 you can't shutdown your brain, and you shouldn't watch a movie like this in the first place for "the criticism".
Call me a cheater but Berenger deserve some respect as B actor, therefore i rate it: 7/10 Hopefully we will see him back in Sniper 3 "that would be something" :)
All and All.... Cool Berenger Movie!
Cheers
Incomprehensible crud
hwyhobo26 May 2007
I cannot believe this movie is scoring so high. Just above everything in this film is wrong. The setting is wrong. The language spoken is wrong. The second sniper being black and not attracting any attention on the streets or from the Serbian soldiers is ludicrous (this is supposedly Serbia, people, not Los Angeles). Tom Berenger, a "sniper", cannot tell a Mosin Nagant from a Mauser. Every fender bender results in spectacular explosions of multiple vehicles. To add insult to injury, Tom Berenger is so overweight, in the scene where he is "running away" from the soldiers, he looks like he is about the have a stroke after 50 steps or so.
This flick is an insult to one's intelligence. It makes Steven Seagal's movies look downright intellectual.
This flick is an insult to one's intelligence. It makes Steven Seagal's movies look downright intellectual.
Unbelievably stupid movie with no sense at all
NemkeSRB26 September 2012
I watched first part of "Sniper" movie and it was decent. But this part 2 is just retarded! I needed like 45 mins into movie to figure out who is the "bad guy", where he's from, where's this movie taking part, why are they talking different language than supposed and how did they manage to place Serbian town Poaervac into Hungary, how the hell muslims lived 600 years in Eastern Europe etc.
For all of you who don't know the facts, let me help you:
1. This movie is filmed in Hungary, the story of the movie is taking place in Hungary too, but it's supposed to be taking place in Serbia 2. Actors speak Hungarian language, but they are supposedly Serbs 3. They transport imprisoned Cole from Hungarian town to Poarevac (Serbian town), like those 2 towns are in the same country and there are no borders 4. Sophia's brothers have Serbian names, but they speak Hungarian 5. That rifle isn't German Mauser by the way 6. It's not the muslims (Bosnians) who lived there for 600 years, but Serbs and Croats 7. It's not Serbs who were killing and expelling Bosnians but vice versa 8. That "Serbian" general they want to kill doesn't have Serbian name at all and he's obviously a Hungarian according to his name 9. A helicopter which "Serbian" special forces used in film has 'SFOR' inscription on it, which means "Stabilisation Force" and it was NATO's "peacekeeping" force, not Serbian 10.This is just another biased anti-Serbian movie, made to once more represent Serbs as terrorists, heartless murders and worst people
Bottom line: this movie insults the intelligence of average man. I put it into top 3 worst movies I've seen in my life. I don't know is it director's ignorance and stupidity, but knowing how America wants to represent Serbs I bet this is just another biased movie funded by American imperialists and masons, probably by George Soros, who himself is Hungarian. So many misleading and wrong historical facts, language replacement, countries swaping, geographical errors.
IF YOU READ THIS - DON'T BOTHER WATCHING THIS CRAP MOVIE!
For all of you who don't know the facts, let me help you:
1. This movie is filmed in Hungary, the story of the movie is taking place in Hungary too, but it's supposed to be taking place in Serbia 2. Actors speak Hungarian language, but they are supposedly Serbs 3. They transport imprisoned Cole from Hungarian town to Poarevac (Serbian town), like those 2 towns are in the same country and there are no borders 4. Sophia's brothers have Serbian names, but they speak Hungarian 5. That rifle isn't German Mauser by the way 6. It's not the muslims (Bosnians) who lived there for 600 years, but Serbs and Croats 7. It's not Serbs who were killing and expelling Bosnians but vice versa 8. That "Serbian" general they want to kill doesn't have Serbian name at all and he's obviously a Hungarian according to his name 9. A helicopter which "Serbian" special forces used in film has 'SFOR' inscription on it, which means "Stabilisation Force" and it was NATO's "peacekeeping" force, not Serbian 10.This is just another biased anti-Serbian movie, made to once more represent Serbs as terrorists, heartless murders and worst people
Bottom line: this movie insults the intelligence of average man. I put it into top 3 worst movies I've seen in my life. I don't know is it director's ignorance and stupidity, but knowing how America wants to represent Serbs I bet this is just another biased movie funded by American imperialists and masons, probably by George Soros, who himself is Hungarian. So many misleading and wrong historical facts, language replacement, countries swaping, geographical errors.
IF YOU READ THIS - DON'T BOTHER WATCHING THIS CRAP MOVIE!
Ughhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
rattus21pz26 April 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Tonight I seemed to have forgotten why I never watch late night movies, but after seeing this film I have realized why again. First off, the plot of the film is Truly preposterous. The US Marine Corps hunts down this old dude (played by Tom Berenger), who supposedly is the best sniper in the country. Apparently he was a disgraced vet (from the first "Sniper" film which I have joyfully avoided seeing)and the US military is aching for snipers...which is ridiculous in the extreme. Anyway our elderly hero apparently gets lost on his way to take out the dictator strongman in Serbia (which it was emphasized is a "suicide" mission) and ends up in Hungary. I say this as every one of the European actors in the film speak Hungarian and have Hungarian names. I say he got lost because I cannot bring myself to believe that the producers, writers and director of the train wreck have such little faith in the ability of Americans to know the difference between two TOTALLY different countries, cultures, and languages. Give me a break. Aside from that our sniper "expert" can't even tell a difference between a Russian made Mosin Nagant rifle (which he uses in the ENTIRE film) and a German Mauser. This is something that even a novice gun enthusiast would know but it is apparently a fact that has eluded our brave "expert". Anyways, there are also loads of explosions and quite a bit of gun play, but nothing that hasn't been done in a million formulaic movies to come before this one. With that said, if you really must see a sniper movie, go rent "Enemy at the Gates". At least those snipers know what weapons they are firing.
Sniper 2
allmoviesfan16 May 2023
Nine years after the 1993 feature film (shot in Australia) that paired Mater Gunnery Sergeant Thomas Beckett (Tom Berenger) with hotshot Richard Miller (Billy Zane), Beckett - and the franchise, revived as a direct to video offering - is back in action, taking a mission handed to him by military intelligence that has him going to Eastern Europe to assassinate a brutal terrorist leader who is persecuting the locals. He is teamed with a mysterious spotter named Cole (Bokeem Woodbine, who I last saw in The Rock) for what is an off-the-books mission. It's after they accomplish what Beckett believed to be the mission that things get complicated.
Whilst not as good a film as the original, Sniper 2 also isn't to bad. The grim, war-torn Eastern European setting helped make things gritty, and Berenger is pretty good as the jaded, grizzled Thomas Beckett. Throw in a few decent action scenes and you've got a fun movie, if you like the military/war genre. Certainly, there are worse ways to spend 90 minutes.
Whilst not as good a film as the original, Sniper 2 also isn't to bad. The grim, war-torn Eastern European setting helped make things gritty, and Berenger is pretty good as the jaded, grizzled Thomas Beckett. Throw in a few decent action scenes and you've got a fun movie, if you like the military/war genre. Certainly, there are worse ways to spend 90 minutes.
Awful
Darko_Serbia15 February 2006
What country??? Nice question. 1:Who is that Serbian general,I didn't see any Serb in this film,but Hungarians with Serbian names who speaks Magyar. 2:Where were the Muslim population in Hungary,and that destroyed village (if exist) is in Bosnia which is not even near Hungary. 3:Muslim,Afro-American,Serb etc. are speaking Magyar (Hungarian language) Yeah what are the chances for that 0.0000001%. 4:SFOR Choper? How does it fit in this story? Bosnia is more than 300 km away from Hungary,and when they have crossed the border (and where in their imagination-parallel world like Harry Potter stuff). 5:This is some poor Hungarians effort to make a movie with the best movie maker's in the world (USA) but it has no point at all. The script has no sense at all. Note:This movie is not worth to spend Your time
ridiculous settings and details
kilianheckrodt24 June 2006
Though I like Tom Berenger as an actor, i must say this movie is almost appalling with its contempt of correct/authentic details. The expert don't use the correct names/brands of the gun they are using, nut much worse is, that all Serbians speak Hungarian and the city (supposed to be somewhere in Bosnia) is actually Budapest, which rather easy to notice to anybody who knows the city (you can even read it on tram signs) or Hungary. That alone gives you the feelings, that the producers treat the audience as ignorant, clueless morons being unable to tell one European country from another (in the case of 2 ethnically and culturally rather distinct countries not even neighbouring each other).
not high art,but entertaining
disdressed1225 June 2010
from an entertainment perspective this movie was a s good as the first,in my opinion,maybe even better.there's more action,and more tension and suspense.i also liked the secondary characters a bit more.i thought they were more interesting.the story is a bit of a stretch,and not thing original,but that didn't bother me too much in this case.Tom Berenger returns to reprises his role from the original.this time,he's teamed up with Bokeem Woodbine,who's got good screen presence.Linden Ashby and Dan Butler have small supporting roles and both do good with what they are given.like this first movie,this could never be accused of being high art.but it is very entertaining.for me,Sniper 2 is a solid 8/10
so bad that its funny
freeman9228 July 2009
Warning: Spoilers
OK, let's get started here. The plot itself is decent. Kill a renegade general responsible for ethnic cleansing and then escape. But that is only the beginning. What is screwed up is that Beckett, who is the main character, is called back from retirement into service, even though he lost his index finger he uses for shooting (and has to use his middle finger for shooting). And Beckett is teamed up with a guy named Cole, who was in jail for killing an officer he suspects betrayed them (he rants about it in the movie in the middle of a battle). The only real good part of the movie is when the Serbian general (who really is Hungarian) is assassinated. The makers of the movie must be on weed. They think that no one will notice that the Serbs are all speaking Hungarian (which has no connection at all to Serbian language even though both nations share the same borders together). Of course, they thought wrong. And since when was a Mosin-Nagant, which Beckett uses, a Mauser? Beckett claims that it's a Mauser. And I thought military personnel were to know their guns. The mission itself supposedly takes place after Milosevic was overthrown in 2000, yet the Serbs claim in the movie they are victims of so-called UN-backed atrocities, but Serbia rejoined the UN after Milosevic was ousted. The acting is poor in many cases as well. For example, Beckett throws his arm up in the air just to look at his watch and when he gives Cole a 'serious' lecture, Cole is about to laugh but holds it in. Had the makers actually PUT serious effort into making this movie I would enjoy it. But unfortunately this is not the case.
Overall a 4/10
Overall a 4/10
Awfully Awful!
alex-125011 June 2007
Unbearable.
I couldn't believe how hard it was to watch everyone in that movie making a fool of themselves.
Like they're trying to achieve their military objectives,yet they're so delusional they don't even know what country they're in.
Hungarians and Serbs maybe neighbours,but they are worlds apart. It's like making a film about WW2 Germany in Paris,France and in french.
I just shows how little America knows about Europe,its peoples and languages...
and if they know so little,why on earth do they even bother?
I couldn't believe how hard it was to watch everyone in that movie making a fool of themselves.
Like they're trying to achieve their military objectives,yet they're so delusional they don't even know what country they're in.
Hungarians and Serbs maybe neighbours,but they are worlds apart. It's like making a film about WW2 Germany in Paris,France and in french.
I just shows how little America knows about Europe,its peoples and languages...
and if they know so little,why on earth do they even bother?
Do yourself a favour; poke a pencil in your eye
davesmith-20-5310505 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Truly the worst film of it's genre I have ever has the displeasure of sitting through.
But... it's possibly so bad that it's good. I mean it actually had me laughing out loud. It is truly that bad.
Many points (such as trying to pass Hungray off as Serbia) have been dutifully covered. And the exploding cars. But the funniest thing is the complete, disjointed randomness of the whole movie.
Why does ever car explode like it has a case of C4 in the trunk you may wonder? Well check out the tram-hitting-the-police cars scene and tell me why the cars explode BEFORE the tram hits them! Also after Cole is captured, why is there an random clip of a Luftwaffe Panavia Tornado taking off? Why? Also why on earth is Cole picked for this mission? I am of course referring to the fact that he is black and supposed to be going undercover to the Balkans, where he might just stand out a little....
If you haven't watched it, and don't have a pencil handy to poke yourself in the eye, then watch this movie. Then pick out your most ridiculous, random moment from this truly shocking piece of cinema. But just remember that's 90 minutes of your life you can never have back.
But... it's possibly so bad that it's good. I mean it actually had me laughing out loud. It is truly that bad.
Many points (such as trying to pass Hungray off as Serbia) have been dutifully covered. And the exploding cars. But the funniest thing is the complete, disjointed randomness of the whole movie.
Why does ever car explode like it has a case of C4 in the trunk you may wonder? Well check out the tram-hitting-the-police cars scene and tell me why the cars explode BEFORE the tram hits them! Also after Cole is captured, why is there an random clip of a Luftwaffe Panavia Tornado taking off? Why? Also why on earth is Cole picked for this mission? I am of course referring to the fact that he is black and supposed to be going undercover to the Balkans, where he might just stand out a little....
If you haven't watched it, and don't have a pencil handy to poke yourself in the eye, then watch this movie. Then pick out your most ridiculous, random moment from this truly shocking piece of cinema. But just remember that's 90 minutes of your life you can never have back.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
