3/10
Poor
31 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Porky's 2 was saddled with the unenviable task of following up The Most Successful Film In Canadain History(TM). It had the majority of the original cast and the same writer/director - what could possibly go wrong? Well, just about everything ...

The original Porky's helped to create the genre of the American high school sex-comedy - still a hugely popular and bankable theme today. Whilst the original creamed $111 million at the US box office, the sequel only scored a limp $33 million.

The problem with Porky's II is that it is supposed to be a sex-comedy, yet it has no sex and very little comedy. Whilst the original film had a pretty flimsy plot, at least it had one. The characters had clear motives, be it getting laid or taking revenge on Porky's. In the sequel the main motivation of the characters is to get a series of Shakespeare plays performed by their school drama group. Yes, that's right - they are no longer seeking out the pleasures of strip bars, peeping on the girls showers or trying to bed nubile cheerleaders - they want to perform a midsummer night's dream.

It's hard to come up with a more poorly conceived plot device for the Porky's series. It takes some suspension of disbelief to think that the likes of Pee Wee and Meat are going to do battle with folk of angel beach so they put on the works of the great bard.

The villains of this piece are also poorly realised. There is an extremely annoying hypocritical Reverend and a slimy politician. The role of Miss Balbricker is downplayed and Porky (the title character!) doesn't even appear in the film.

The "jokes" here are laboured, far outstaying their welcome. The best (worst?) example of this is the final scene in the restaurant where Wendy exacts revenge on the duplicitous politician. It is a scene so overdone, so overacted that it is painful to watch. To be this bad takes sausAGES.

Fans of the Porky film are not hard to please. Take some low brow comedy, add in copious amounts of gratuitous nudity and start counting in the cash. Remove these elements and you are left with a 90 minute waste of celluloid.
9 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed