The reviews coming out are sounding predictable and much like the reviews of Volume one which to me was one of the worst films i ever saw and i am not shy about admitting that.
Fine the reviews seem positive but they largely seem to be an attempt at convincing the general public who might have found Vol 1 severly flawed that this time round, you shall have less of the over board action and a deeper more intense story this time round. I am sorry but i am just not sold, a review with qualifiers like "If you didnt like the first one you wont like this one too" and other reviews talking about how you really dont need to have seen the first one to enjoy
the second, only confirm my assertion that its just continuation of the same bland story line with no depth, and an array of characters who still fail to connect with the audience. I am anxious to see this so called role of Carradines that apparently deserves a nomination for best actor (i hope you all noticed that Ebert and Roeper review only calls for a simple nomination and does not declare it as award winning.) Such things tell me that their claims are far fromt he truth like they did the last time around with Uma Thurman whose performance turned out to be not even worth mentioning in the same breath with the Academny awards. I have seen Carradine in his youth and his old age and wonder how in the world he would be able to pull off a convincing role as some ruthless murderer. Another thing that has my attention peaked is the length of the movie, 137 minutes. thats 2 hours and 17 minutes. If tarantino made the same mistake and is delivering the same mechanic characters in unconvincing roles, this movie is gonna get yanked from the theatres after less than 3 or 4 weeks. (Its just business nothing personal).