ian-864 On paper this movie should be funny. It's not. I can't quite put my finger on why. Maybe it started poorly with a clichèd vomit scene that was just disgusting. Maybe it's that the characters are poorly written, or that the "what goes wrong?" Premises that are the staple of this kind of movie, are ludicrous. Oddly, I found the movie really annoying. Didn't even watch until the end bacause I couldn't care less what happens to the story or any of the characters.

Gavin Purtell 'Bad Neighbours 2' (or 'Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising' in America) is a straightforward comedy sequel - all that's changed is the frat next door is replaced with a sorority (one of the funnier scenes involves how to spell "sorority"!). Mac (Rogen) & Kelly (Byrne) are back - as are the cute twins who play their daughter, now two years older - and still at it (literally in the opening scene). Shelby (Moretz) plays the leader of the new sorority moving in next door, but they do take some time to build her character, along with Beth (Clemons) and Nora (Feldstein) and make them non-stereotypical teenage girls - for the most part.There's a fair bit that doesn't work: still heaps of pot, most of it unnecessary, with Rogen must have written into his contracts or he won't appear, the predictable ending, annoying party/crap music scene(s) and some swearing/jokes that don't hit the mark. However, the majority of jokes - and pranks - are funny and do work.There's some feminism and pro-gay sentiment in there - and one great/terrible Jewish joke - but it's not sentimental or anything. Never going to blow minds or be a game-changer, but a decent way to spend 90min. And plenty of shirtless Efron or the ladies!

brando647 NEIGHBORS was a fun movie. It told it's story about a couple of new parents who are struggling to accept adulthood battling a legion of college frat members as led by a young man who was rapidly approaching his own moment where he'd have to learn to become an adult as his graduation looms. It's all about both sides inability to let go of carefree youth and accept their responsibilities, focusing their energies on an escalating prank war against each other instead. It made its point. It was funny. It ended. That should have been it. For some reason, it was followed by NEIGHBORS 2 (originally with the subtitle SORORITY RISING, but that seems to have since been dropped). We check back in on Mac (Seth Rogen) and Kelly (Rose Byrne) Radner who are about to have their second child and they're preparing to sell the home they bought (and fought for) in NEIGHBORS to upgrade to a larger home. They've got an interested buyer and all they have to do is get through 30 days of escrow and the deal is done. Unfortunately for them, a group of outcasts from the local college have decided to rebel against college regulations that prevent sororities from throwing parties. These three girls, led by Shelby (Chloë Grace Moretz), found their own sorority, Kappa Nu, in the house next door to the Radners and the battle starts all over again. It's round two of the battle of the young versus the not-quite-as-young (late 30's?).Comedy sequels are a tricky business because you don't want it to come across as a cash grab. It's real easy for a studio to see a comedy do better than expected and immediately dump money into a sequel that rehashes all the jokes and plot devices from the first film. I'm looking at you, HANGOVER II. The second NEIGHBORS movie actually tries to add something new to the series. I appreciated how one of the first things director Nicholas Stoller addressed in the film's commentary (yes, I listened) was the fact that comedy sequels are generally a bad idea because comedies are premise-based and it makes additional movies tough since you're sort of stuck adhering to the premise that was so popular. So he was aware he'd have to keep the age gap prank war gimmick but he found a way to mix it up, making the adversary a sorority. I'm not saying "It's different because they're girls this time"; it's because the sorority is a bit more sympathetic. The battle isn't against cocky frat guys whose pride won't let them give the Radners peace. It's against a trio of girls who are a bit awkward and were having a rough go at college before they came together and were determined to buck the system and have the first sorority that can throw its own parties instead of forcing them to attend frat parties. They just want equal privileges, and they're not fighting for spite but for survival.Does it make a huge difference? Big enough, I guess. NEIGHBORS 2 still retreads a lot of the same ground as the first film. The motivations have changed but the execution is the same. The movie even brings back the Radners' former nemesis Teddy (Zac Efron), originally as an adviser to the sorority seeking revenge for his frat before jumping ship to team with the Radners against this new threat. I said it for NEIGHBORS and I'll say it again: Zac Efron is a funny dude. He's one of the best parts of these NEIGHBORS movies. Rogen and Byrne are great in their own right but, just as with the first movie a bit, some of their lines (improv?) seemed forced and disingenuous. Efron's delivery and performance is more natural; I genuinely buy him as a muscle-bound halfwit who only knows a life of partying and sincerely wishes his life held some sort of value. The girls in the sorority do a pretty good job but I found it harder to believe their dip into utter villainy by the end (in part because they were so sympathetic). When Shelby and her friends start chucking tampons at the Radners' house, it feels too extreme for them because I don't think the movie established them as insane as the fraternity from the first film. Regardless, it all works well enough that NEIGHBORS 2 will entertain anyone who liked the first movie. It's pretty harmless. We didn't need it. We got it anyway, it's way better than it could've been, but it's not quite funny/different enough to have warranted its existence in the first place.

mmcgee282 It seemed to have sneaky conservative political propaganda, sometimes known as fake liberal political correctness or demo publican ism .I was very uncomfortable through out the film.I saw it on h.b.o .This was no National Lampoons animal house.The movie was making fun of the married couples expecting and wanting to sell their house for a new one, they wish listed earlier.It made fun of real estate.It also was really poking fun at sister sorry houses.When it came to the bro sorority house.They did not make fun of it enough.The straight character was satirized, but worst the gay member was not satirized at all.They were not funny.They were acting the same way Margaret Dumont acted in the Marx brothers.Adding a gay marriage threw off the story too.The real student usually wait till they graduate and have money in the bank, young single ones before they decide they want to get married.The only married college student is the one that started college too late. It all dawned on me about the message in this film.Singles are irresponsible and those who get married are not.It looked that way.07/25/17