Yea competition really made a difference last week for Inside Out.

I agree that it was too long and wildly uneven. There was also really weren't any moments that had me rolling like the first one. I did quite enjoy the cameo, but I may have been the only one in the theater laughing at it.

To be fair that's pretty different though. Inside Out is a Pixar film that parents will take their kids to. Disney pretty much prints money no matter what they release. Same with Jurassic World, it's not completely a kids film but it's kid friendly enough that families will go see it. Ted 2 is a comedy aimed at adults and its not really surprising that it isn't faring so well with competition from those two films. I haven't seen it so I can't say if the film is better or worse than the first, but I'm sure it's a combination of competition and not living up to the first.

It's Pixar. Use your head.

Yeah, fuck Pixar for taking two years to release another film.

I liked the nods to THE BREAKFAST CLUB; PLANES, TRAINS & AUTOMOBILES; and even INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM - but was wondering how many in the theater actually GOT those three (especially the INDY nod). The only movie spoof that got universally recognized was JURASSIC PARK.

I liked the Liam bit a lot. And Amanda Seyfried is a sport for letting Seth make fun of her eyes...something we've ALL commented on for years.

I agree the movie was uneven...and too long. Probably needed about 20 minutes trimmed.

Even so, I thought it was about as good as the first film.

Just saw it. Not bad but a very uneven film in my opinion. I enjoyed the Liam Neeson bits as well as the reference to Planes, Trains, and Automobiles. Patrick Warburton and Michael Dorn were both funny too as was the stuff at New York Comic Con. To me it seemed like the film ran a bit long and I was ready for it to be over. I'd say it's the weakest of MacFarlane's films but it wasn't necessarily bad.

Oh yeah, what happened at the very beginning? I came in during the musical number credits.

Thanks. I was wondering about that "One Year Later" thing, but I guess not much was missed. Did they explain

Also a little weird that every woman in the movie wanted Mark Wahlberg's nuts.

It's a little different when you're talking Pixar though, they have a lot of cache.

And a lot of cash as well.

There aren't any movies presently in competition with Ted 2. But whatever. The Ted 2 defenders unite.

Yeah, there really was very little competition this frame for R-rated comedy, Ted just wasn't as popular as they were lead to believe based on B.O. grosses and rentals. Frankly, while I enjoyed the first movie well enough, it was hugely uneven and I wasn't really hankering for more -- they covered most of what I wanted to see out of a foul mouth teddy bear.

Movies like Ted usually go after the young adult men (17 - 34) and couples. In Ted 2's case, 51% were over 25, and 59% were Male.

I thought Ted 1 was a very funny movie, but I'll wait for cable for Ted 2. My whole beef with Ted 1 was the movie goes on too long as the whole subplot with Giovani Riobisi (spelling?) was not needed. It was one of those comedies that has really funny parts that I enjoy watching and then parts of the movie I change the channel. That is why its a perfect cable movie cause you can channel surf and go back when the funny parts come on, but not worthy of seeing it in the movies.

Ted 2 has the same problem. It definitely could have been trimmed by about twenty to thirty minutes in my opinion. A lot of stuff just feels like filler to make the film almost two hours.

Also I wasn't offended by anything but one thing I feel like MacFarlane over-used in this film is swearing. I mean swearing is funny when its used for effect but at times in the film it just felt like they were trying to put in as much usage of the word fuck as they could and it didn't feel natural and wasn't funny. I can't remember if his other two films were the same way but for some reason I don't remember noticing that as much in Ted or A Million Ways to Die in the West. They both had a lot of cursing and whatnot but I don't remember it seeming as forced as it did in this film.

No comedy should be more then 90-95 minutes, as usually the ones closer to 2 hours have lulls in the movie and its obvious what could be trimmed. I wonder what Ted 1 would be like if they took out the whole Giovani Riobisi sub-plot.

Apatow is still the king of the overlong comedy.

It was unnecessary, but the whole Tiffany "I Think We're Alone Now" part cracks me up every time.

"Fuck me eyes?"

"No, your eyes are more 'The precious, give us the precious!'"
"Who's Gollum?"
"A supermodel."


This was funny, but way, way, way, way too long. It's collection of gags which are obviously McFarlane's prime interest strung together by a plot which he no skill in orchestrating. As a director, he's a step away from Kevin Smith's "point and shoot" philosophy, but he's still just doing what he's doing to support the jokes.

The cameos were well-handled; Jay Leno is nicely self-deprecating, and Liam Neeson's bit was fucking hilarious. The individual sketches and bit are quite funny, though the Comic-Con nerd-shaming and the fact that lawyer who went to law school to actually learn intellectually valuable things has no pop-culture knowledge joke grows thin.

The whole thing feels like a collection of bits, some of which you could've just excised entirely; jizz jokes, more weed jokes, the whole rooftop scene, the improv bit, a punch of pop-culture references which will be dated in six months. I laughed at this movie. A lot. But it was overstretched all to hell and still feel like a sketch, or a series of them, strung out to feature-length. The central thesis-and rather blatant gay rights allegory-is worthwhile, but McFarlane isn't really a strong enough satirist to make it fly.

Apparently, weed is just hilarious. How many pot jokes does one film need, seriously? So a professional lawyer who looks like a model and went to law school likes nothing better than sitting around with a bong?

The level of narrative self-indulgent male fantasy in having Mark Whalberg's overgrown manchild being hit on by every gorgeous woman who comes within 50 of him is almost offensive.

It's even more pointless in this one. And it drags out a movie which is already way, way, way too long. The whole subplot could've been cut out completely and no one would care.

This is 40 Minutes Too Long. Though to be fair, his films do actually tend to have something of a narrative and moral.

A half hour too long, rushed ending, and very uneven, but overall I enjoyed it. Got a huge laugh at the

I didn't see it opening night like I claimed I would a few pages ago, but I did see it today. I liked it. It's a sequel to a movie about a foul-mouthed talking stoner teddy bear. I expected more off-color tasteless jokes, and stoner humor. It delivered. I also enjoy Family Guy, including the cutaways, and the much ballyhooed improv theater scene is pretty much a Family Guy cutaway.

Only thing I missed was the at Comic Con. But I'll wait it to come on HBO (probably around September) to look for that bit again.