Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues (2013) User Reviews

People have revisionist history

[Bradley-Grube · 7/10 · 5 January 2014]

I remember way back in 2004 when I went to the theater in high anticipation of Will Ferrell's first starring vehicle(he was really a supporting actor in "Old School") in the original "Anchorman". I walked out of the theater feeling somewhat disappointed that the movie was just a so-so effort by a comedian I highly respected as one of the funniest people in the business. Over the next ten years,however, I became one of the legions of people who could quote the movie beginning to end while laughing myself into a stupor. Oh how I would continuously quote "It means a whale's vagina" or "60% of the time, it works every time". My point? I believe "Anchorman 2" will follow the same pattern with people. I have read many of the user reviews of this movie and they mostly provide the same complaint over and over again that the movie was sophomoric, vulgar and stupid and didn't live up to the original. Really? I challenge those same people to look at the user reviews for the first "Anchorman" in 2004. I'll give you a hint: They are the same reviews! Yet today, "Anchorman" is considered one of the greatest and most quotable comedies since "Animal House" and "Airplane". Why? I believe it is because Ferrell and Adam McKay try to pack in so many jokes into one movie (almost every other line!) that many jokes go over peoples heads, some inevitably just don't work or viewers miss them entirely because they are laughing from a previous joke. This is the same style of rapid fire comedy we are accustomed to seeing from Ferrell and McKay, as evidenced by the first "Anchorman", "Talladega Nights" and "Step Brothers". Over time and after re-watching these movies again and again, the jokes get rediscovered and the movie gets funnier.

That is not to say that this sequel is as good as the first. Many jokes did not land and, in my opinion, the side story with Steve Carrell and Kristin Wiig was just not that funny. HOWEVER...there were quite a lot of jokes that did land. Smoking crack on television (who knew you couldn't smoke crack on live television?), Champ Kind's chicken restaurant("I'm not eating that!"), the dinner with his girlfriend's parents ("say whaaaat?"), his relationship with his son, etc. For the critics who feel this movie didn't live up to the original, I ask that you remember how you felt about it in 2004 instead of the years (and multiple viewings) following its release. To the critics who just felt it was stupid, I wonder if you even liked the first. To those who are fans of Ron Burgundy and his band of idiots and who have yet to see it, just remember that you will have to watch this again and again in order to really appreciate it...just like the first movie.

Feel like I have just received a massive kick to the genitals.

[The_moan_of_all_moans · 5/10 · 22 December 2013]

I still remember the feeling; that aura of anticipation that i felt when the announcement was made. Anchorman 2 was in production. Finally, big Ron was on his way back!!! The magical news team where going to be gracing the big screen and i couldn't have been any more excited.

The first film was very close to comedic perfection; it had everything that was needed and much like any film that you thoroughly enjoy you want to see more, but in the back of your mind you don't want the film to become tainted.

And although this film has its droves of fans, for me it was incredibly disappointing. They took it too far. The stupidity in the first film was perfectly balanced. It was funny. This however was over the top. There are certain scenes that are very uncomfortable to watch as they try so hard to make you laugh. And as the ridiculousness accelerated, my gut began to churn and any smile that wanted to force it's way out to stay loyal to the first film was obliterated and all that was left was me,- insert summary here -.

Disappointment is too feeble of an explanation to how gutted i was at the way this film played out. So much of the first film was regurgitated. First couple of carbon copy moments i tried to ignore and enjoy but it eventually became so obvious and so desperate. The continual "by the beard of...", like quotations from Ron was tedious. And the shark....well i'll let you see that farcical moment for yourselves.

I tried, i really tried to enjoy this film, and yes, it had it's fair share of moments that made me laugh, but it is nothing more than a moneymaker. And it will do its job. But that doesn't stop it from being a massive let down. Sequels tend to work when they are planned, not when they are demanded.

You need to watch it again.

[lawrencelawrence86 · 7/10 · 7 February 2021]

I was so disappointed after the 1st viewing and didn't watch it again until today, its actually pretty good, the Harrison Ford scene alone was brilliant, the film just suffered massively from the sheer brilliance of the 1st film, the anticipation was too high but now it has all calmed down watch it again.

Great first half, but tumbled into rehash territory

[ckolet37 · 6/10 · 22 December 2013]

I enjoyed the first Anchorman. It was goofy, yet you had a sense of where it was going. The one liners were flawless, which made it the cult classic it is today. I realized I could only see a movie like this once every two years. When its sequel came around, I expected the same. It was exactly what I expected... In the first half. The first half contained some classic one liners, and fantastic situations these characters are in. The story wasn't that strong, but that was the first Anchorman's problem. The second half was a collapse. A collapse in storytelling, writing, and Will Farrell got a little old. The first half could have gotten at most an eight if it stood alone. The second half was also too overlong, they crammed too many fanfare elements that they felt they needed to keep from the first half. It made it feel like a rehash, not a sequel (trust me, you will know exactly when this happens). In the end, there are things that this first half cannot make up for in the second half. This review, to some may not be a glowing recommendation. However, if you are a fan of the first film, you have probably already have seen this.

First half fairly good, second half barely watchable.

[cabaldivision · 7/10 · 22 December 2013]

The first half of the film was OK, there were some really good new jokes but I don't think it was as well thought out or as fresh as any other Will Farrel film. Some of the ideas were clearly ripped off other Will Farrel films but in a more diluted, less full on way which made it less funny.

For example the part where he gets fired and has to work in an dolphin show for kids and gets drunk is just like Blades Of Glory when he gets fired and has to work in a kids show on ice and gets drunk.

The second half wasn't worth watching, Brick was involved wayyyy to much in the film, they tried to get a deeper storyline with Brick by giving him a girlfriend who is just like him which had to be the most annoying stupid idea ever.

In the first movie brick was just used to shout out one line,For example "I like Ron" or "I love lamp" or "LOUD NOISESSSS". in a few scenes spread out nicely through the entire movie.

BUT in this movie though they drag the Brick jokes out in a torturous way and do it over and over.

The only part in the second half which I laughed at were some of the shark scenes, every other part was either crap or basically copied from the first anchorman film but more crap, the fight scene, Baxtor saving the day again.

It gets a 7 out of 10 only because the first half was funny. If I was to give the second half of the film its own review it would get a 3 out of 10.

About What I Expected (And In This Case That's A Good Thing)

[zkonedog · 6/10 · 4 March 2017]

The first "Anchorman" movie is one of the most quotable comedy movies of all-time. When I sat down in the theater for the long-awaited sequel, I expected more humor along the same lines (if not quite as fresh). That is exactly what I received...and in the case of comedy films that is a win for all parties involved.

For a basic plot summary, "Anchorman 2" tells the story once again of Ron Burgundy (Will Ferrell), a man born to look good and read the news. When wife Veronica Corningstone (Christina Applegate) essentially takes his job, however, Ron must decide what the next direction is that his life should take. With input from the old news team of Brick Tamland (Steve Carrell), Brian Fantana (Paul Rudd), and Champ Kind (David Koechner), Ron decides to pursue an opportunity to land on a 24-hour news station.

This sequel primarily works because of Ferrell's impeccably honed Burgundy character. When some of the jokes inevitably fall flat, sometimes just Ferrell's reactions alone can carry a scene. Without his strong presence, this franchise (and especially this installment) would be utterly lost. Does the movie contain an ensemble cast? To be sure. All the auxiliary parts work well together...but they also have some jokes that fall completely flat or are just plain stupid. Only the "Burgundy scenes" are the ones that are consistently hilarious.

Basically, "Anchorman 2" is a four-star movie (though not five) because it continues the solid humor of the original. It contains more than its share of fresh jokes, but others are just a bit stale because they have essentially been done before. That's not fault of its own, of course, but the characters were just so fresh in the original that now they don't "pop" quite as much here. Essentially, this is probably about the best sequel that could have been expected for this franchise.

Just awful...

[leonhart35 · 1/10 · 8 January 2014]

Of all the things I expected to feel when I walked out of the cinema after seeing this film, disgusted that I paid money to watch it was not one of them.

No effort has been made to actually make this film any good, or any actual sequel to the first. The writers have just crammed it with as much stuff as they could that made the first film so brilliant, and all they succeeded in doing was making it an overblown, awkward film that leaves you knowing that during every seen they're just trying to force a laugh out of you. Its also been a long time that I was so consciously aware that the actors are just performing lines for a camera, there's nothing natural about any of them. It all feels painfully scripted, all the one liners blatantly placed just to drag a laugh kicking and screaming from your lips.

The last 45 minutes goes off on such a bizarre tangent I honestly had no idea what the hell was going on or what the purpose of any of it was.

Truly disappointed with this film, and incredibly annoyed by the knowledge that it'll be a box office smash purely because the first one is such a legendary film.

Disregard other reviews. Watch this movie. You will laugh out loud non stop

[Lampinerryday420 · 10/10 · 11 April 2014]

Now i never ever have written a review for anything. But this movie was so funny that i got on here created an account just to tell everybody that this movie is by far the funniest film I've seen in the last 5 years. Its legit laugh out loud material. Ron Burgundy stays killin it as usual. If you don't think this movie is funny, then YOU don't know funny. Its like all the reviews saying this movie is so over the top it had too many jokes it was a disappointment is like going to the strip club and then saying that it had to many boobies inside and it was over the top and a disappointment. I just don't get how anybody could not be comically satisfied after watching this film.

Great fun, but the element of surprise is missing. (***1/2)

[filmfanperspective · 7/10 · 5 May 2015]

This will be hard to admit, but from time to time, a film occasionally surprises me- and I'm proved wrong. My first experience with the original "Anchorman" ended up being one of those times. I didn't see it theatrically, and waited until a friend forced it upon me. What a revelation it was- a straight-up comedy, incredibly well-made and structured, with nearly every joke hitting the mark. Sure, it's a complete farce, but one that worked extremely well. Audiences didn't initially warm up to the theatrical release, but like a cult film, it found an immense audience on DVD- including myself.

It comes as no surprise that there has been clamor for a sequel- the only issue is that Paramount had strong misgivings about making one. The box office wasn't strong for the first film, and farce comedies don't generally perform well. It's wonderful that this did get made, however. Not only does it satisfy fans of the first film, but it contains enough fresh material and biting sarcasm to go around. It may not be as crisp as the first, and it contains a few awkward moments, but overall, it deserves kudos for continuing to take risks, and I laughed out loud multiple times.

Summarizing the plot should be rather straightforward. The blustering Ron Burgundy (Farrell) has now married the daring anchorwoman from the first film, Veronica Corningstone (Applegate), with whom he has fathered young Walter. Life is beautiful for them until Mack Tannen (Harrison Ford) decides to retire at the network and makes Veronica, not Ron, the lead nightly anchor. Ron can't handle it, leaves the network, leaves Veronica & Walter, and ends up back in San Diego, drunk in front of Sea World crowds. Luckily for him, he meets a recruiter looking to start a 24 hour news network in New York City. The idea sounds ludicrous to Ron, but perfectly normal and sane to us.

Aside from the jokes and scenarios you can imagine after seeing the first film, the sequel offers a biting satire of today's version of the "news". With news networks on all the time, it's necessary to fill that space with CONTENT. How do these networks acquire this content? Is it possible that the content isn't always 'newsworthy'? Is it possible the boundaries of acceptable news stories have stretched a tad over the years? Answers to all questions are a resounding yes. The fact that news and news anchors are now trusted less by the public are part of the reason that these two films exist, and that the farce is so resonant. It's an unfortunate but true part of our society.

Thankfully, "Anchorman 2″ understands the folly that is a good portion of news today. By showcasing Ron Burgundy on a screen surrounded by multiple talking heads, with headlines running across the top and bottom of the screen, we can clearly see how crowded news delivery is today. Creating a scene with Brick Tamland (Carell) going postal in front of a green screen points out the hilarity that is broadcast meteorology. After all, do we need high- tech graphics to tell us what weather is coming our way? The whole thing is silly, really, which is most likely the reason why these films work so well.

If there are downsides to having this much fun at the theater, it's the occasional overkill. Farce is susceptible to such things, and at nearly two hours, the film occasionally runs into that. The subplot involving Ron going blind and living in exile could have been skipped. Also unnecessary are the oddly repetitive and off- putting actions of Champ Kind (Koechner), illustrating the need for a more well-rounded character (or perhaps actor? This film illustrates why Koechner hasn't been nearly as successful as his comrades). Poor Christina Applegate doesn't have much to do this time around except react to what Will Ferrell's character does to her, and the attempt to give Meagan Good's producer a meaty role falls a bit short.

For its' minor drawbacks, "Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues" is still the year's funniest film. It's also an obvious achievement, not only to get these actors together again, but to give us a film that is worthy of our attention, all while inventing a few new laughs and trying its' hand at social commentary. If there is another sequel, I'm not sure there is anything left to comment on. We know the 'news' is no longer news, and so we, the audience, have to choose what we consume. It's a laborious task- perhaps one of the reasons why so many flock to The Onion, 'The Daily Show', and for all intents and purposes, 'Anchorman' films.

Old ... and painful

[jij98111 · 3/10 · 14 March 2014]

The jokes are not funny. Will Ferrell is stale. A waste of time. Unfortunately, it looks as though this script was written while smoking newly legalized weed and a parody of a parody is what this turned out to be.

I find it very hard to believe the ratings on this movie and I am convinced, more than I have ever been before, that many ratings are simply a figment of marketing and that many movie viewers knee-jerk react to 'names' and slick advertising to approve of junk that under ordinary circumstances they would reject immediately. The Hollywood marketing machine has created a dud.

Snobs

[ajk08 · 8/10 · 30 December 2013]

Sick to death of reading reviews starting with 'I was a massive fan of the first movie', well this isn't the first movie, its a different movie, stop comparing them!

Anchorman received a big cult following for a reason, it was hilarious, awkward, weird and completely random in places. It has to to be said its one of my favorite ever comedies.

But seriously!? What did you expect, something completely different? No! I didn't! I didn't want something completely different. I wanted more Ron burgundy, and plenty more brick tamland, which is what we got. Personally loved the film and cant understand why anybody didn't enjoy the original wouldn't like it too (unless you seem to think a movie called Anchorman 2, yes thats 2, needed to be something completely new and off the wall).

Sometimes think people need to get there head out there arse and just watch a film for the pure entertainment purposes it was made for.

Rant over. 8/10.

Know what you're in for

[ODDBear · 7/10 · 30 December 2013]

The further adventures of Ron Burgundy and his fellow news teammates yields quite a few laugh-out-laud gags and more than a few head scratches. I guess this is one of those films that depends heavily on knowing what you're in for. The first one was a big indicator and I had a hell of a good time with this.

I liked many of the jabs at modern news reporting and ratings and others that range from synergies to the chicken industry. Many quite good and to the point. Then there are those moments you're embarrassed to laugh at (the one with Paul Rudd's "Ladykiller" friends, for example) and will definitely offend more than a few. And this is, naturally, all done in the most over the top manner possible.

For some reason the bits with Steve Carell and Kirsten Wiig fell a bit flat for me but overall I completely enjoyed the film's excessiveness. Will Ferrell owns this role and everyone else gives it a fun go.

Get yourself in the right frame of mind and most likely you'll enjoy it.

Bottle feeding the shark?

[jackbanister16 · 2/10 · 28 December 2013]

**Before I write my review, I want to make it known that I went into Anchorman 2 expecting over the topness, funny one liners, plenty of gags, and generally having low expectations given the trailers and over advertisement.**

Despite having already low expectations, I was STILL disappointed.

Happy Days coined the term "jumping the shark," generally used for a television show that is declining in quality and attempts to use an outrageous plot device to keep viewer's interest. Anchorman 2 has not only jumped the shark, but it has given us a modern update to that term, "Bottle Feeding the shark." Not wanting to believe the movie could be so atrocious, I am actually trying to convince myself the shark feeding sequence was the film poking fun at itself and realizing it was terrible. If that was the case, it's a hilarious satirical movie. If not, it's a steaming pile of dung, which I suspect is the case.

THE GOOD:

• The celebrity cameos were mildly, and I mean very mildly entertaining but they came far too late to save the movie.

• A few laugh out loud sequences (the first 30 minutes).

• Ummmmm....Nothing else really. :/

THE BAD:

• Just not a funny movie despite trying so hard. Forced humor and a truly awful script written by Will Ferrell. It seems like Will Ferrell sat in a focus group of adolescent males aged 12-17 and put whatever they deemed "funny" into his script. Plenty of penis and vagina jokes for you potty humor enthusiasts out there!

• The black jokes and black dinner sequence were clichéd and boring. Everyone has heard a white person or comedian imitate a black person thousands of times and seeing Will Ferrell do it is not much funnier. I'm not easily offended, but more easily offended people would feel uncomfortable with these scenes in the movie.

• No quotable quotes. Anyone who saw Anchorman #1 can at LEAST rattle off a, "Stay Classy San Diego," or a "60% of the time it works every time." quote. No such luck here; there are no memorable quotes or sayings in this one. There was also a feeble attempt to recreate the "sex panther" scene with Brian's secret drawer, but it was forced and stupid. You can bet that there will be a product line of Anchorman condoms coming out though as a result...

• The film randomly tried to get serious with its whole, "The American people deserve the truth, etc." line at the end. I agree with the sentiment, but it was poorly placed in the movie and came off as a forced message.

• Bad script, unfunny characters, and the same tired situations are basically what sunk this film. Nothing good about it in all honesty.

THE UGLY:

• Brick aka Steve Carell. Straight up. He was tolerable in the first film because his randomness was well timed and just so out of the blue that all you could do was laugh. In the sequel it is flat out annoying. I have never felt so much disdain for a fictional character in my life. From the first "death" scene to the last "marriage" scene I despised every second of Steve Carell's screen time. Whoever thought to give Brick a love interest should be exiled from film making and possibly planet earth for all of eternity. I guess it was their poor attempt to give Brick's character another dimension other than just seeming like a retard the whole time. Ugh, his love interest was a mix of Brick and Kristen Wiig's character from Bridesmaids. To sum it up a combo of awkward and ANNOYING.

If it weren't for Brick being reintroduced in this film, I'd probably give it 4 MAYBE even 5 stars, but I actually felt mentally abused by how annoying his character was. Long story short, I could probably write a novel on how awful this film was, but this review satisfies my need to vent. If you value your time and don't want to waste it, do NOT see this film. If you must see it; Don't waste $10 or even a matinée admission price on this garbage, just red box it.

Not as good as the first one, but still a bunch of fun!

[sethmlanders · 7/10 · 5 January 2014]

I was a big fan of Anchorman for so long. Will Ferrell's performance is as the type of hero that is so unlikable to the point of ironically being likable and amusing. The jokes were vulgar yet great, it had a charmed that I remember, and the conflict of these characters really made it entertaining to watch. So when I heard all the hype about the sequel, I got eager. The trailers were well done and I had fairly high expectations.

Thankfully, I wasn't disappointed (for the most part) and at the same time, it was a great experience in the theater. The effort went all the way to deserve being a great sequel. As far as plot, the original one is better. However, the humor was slightly funnier than the first. I'll be honest I didn't enjoy the performance of the woman who played Linda, the actress for the part didn't feel right and her involvement in the story made me enjoy this movie less than its predecessor. I laughed a lot, especially at the recurring jokes, such as Brick going from grenade to futuristic gun, Brian going from perfume to condoms, or Champ frequently saying "Whammy!" as a catchphrase. I won't spoil anything, but get ready for the traditional random splooge of cameos during the fight, like the first one. It was so satisfying to see all these famous people show up unexpectedly, including Kanye, Drake, John C. Reilley, and Tina Fey to name a few.

Bottom line, although it might not be as good as the first one or even have the same charm, but it was a hilarious movie. It was brilliantly stupid, so don't go into the film expecting it to be an intelligent comedy. The only way to know whether you like it or is to see it. If you're a fan, it's a must-see. Otherwise, enjoy this movie, even if you hate it after wards!

Out there like the first only ramped up to 11

[bassrourke · 7/10 · 8 December 2013]

Funny, obscure and ridiculous comedy comes at you in spades as Ron Burgundy takes on New York in the 1980's. Juvenile and stupid, but it doesn't really matter as that is exactly what you would expect from anyone familiar with Director Adam McKay. The original was a sleeper and the real reason we have a sequel is because of on going fan requests, especially in Australia where Anchorman made massive box office then became a globally cult DVD. There are few comedies that go as quick fire as this, something outrageous is constantly happening, most jokes hit the mark, others spin off into awkwardness, a few do fall flat too, not everything works. Repeated viewings won't be kind. Perfect movie to watch after a few top shelf scotches, sporting salon perfected hair, wearing a new pastel suit or simply enjoying amongst a big appreciative cinema audience. The cameos are a highlight, some you will know, some you may not. Liam Neeson is awesome. Amazing Kristen Wiig is the best new character while Harrison Ford is in rare comic form.

Anchorman 2

[Smiths1-Review · 2 January 2014]

Anchorman 2 gave it a 2/10 poor poor film a waste of my time. Was some funny parts but over all not funny at all. Don't waste your money going to see it. Acting was over the top and desperate very disappointed the characters of the film was not funny . The film tuck the mick out of race, gender,sex and disabled people so if your taking younger people be aware of the content of the film. I would also not see the film if you are easy offended. On overall review it was poor sad long and not funny Would I watch it again No. Would recommend it No Would I buy it No

From C-SS-123 the review that matters

Low expectations helps the viewing experience greatly

[Meven_Stoffat · 7/10 · 5 April 2014]

I find the abundance of negative reviews interesting because despite my rather messy memory, I remember when the first Anchorman film came out. And I can promise you, that film had a similar amount of negative press from users. Yet over the years, with the emergence of social networks and in the school hallways, I'd find words like "Great Odin's raven!" Or "Invitation to the pants party" thrown around like de-icing salt. And I'm pretty sure that this film will have a similar thing going for it. Mind you, I loved the first movie upon first viewing. It had juvenile humour, star power, and easily the best thing about it was that in every scene, the actors were clearly trying not to laugh (pay special attention to Christina Applegate- she's the worst for this in both movies. You can tell when it's getting too much for her because it cuts immediately so she can dissolve into uncontrollable laughter). It was great back then, and it was still great on my most recent viewing.

Of course, I'm not in any way trying to imply that this film is as good as first. For one, it does have a ton of pacing issues- two hours is too long for a comedy like this. The film does tend to get repetitive in places (though not like the first didn't). Yet, much like the earlier released "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug", low expectations was what lessened the blow of that. And of course, the jokes are a bit too out there at times, but really, this is an absurdist comedy. And what it does good, it does very good. There's still tons of really vulgar and puerile jokes, but come on, just remember what kind of film you're watching. That said, what this film really did best was its much deserving dig at those 24 hours "news" networks. I swear, I expect that happened in this movie to happen on those kinds of shitty networks. And of course, like I mentioned above- the star power. It's so great to see the guys having fun again, and struggling once more to keep it in the face. Every single actor has a hard time keeping a straight face in every scene, which is just what makes it funnier. And of course, the completely vulgar jokes work too. Like the scene where they smoke crack on air. Brilliant! The abundance of celebrity cameos adds to the film's absurd and surreal feel, and all are very satisfying and fun to watch.

Point is, as flawed and overlong as the movie is, it's still fun to watch. It is by no means perfect, and the film itself even is aware of it at times. But lower your expectations and you'll have a last. A common complaint I've seen in much of these reviews is that they were "huge fans if the first film" and they're digging their own graves by having such high expectations. For me, the magic was still there, and it still is. And while I'm not sure I'd want an Anchorman 3, this film still entertains greatly. It's been too long since we've seen Ron and his pals behind the news desk, and to see them back together again in itself is a purely satisfying sight

An abomination

[Ammad-Farooqui · 1/10 · 23 December 2013]

I am extremely disappointed with this movie. I was a huge fan of the original and can quote you every single line from that movie however, my expectations weren't too high for this movie because I knew it couldn't be as good as the original. But I was not expecting this movie to be this bad

The story line was awful. The parts of it didn't fit and it kept jumping from scene to scene. They tried to use Brick a little more which in my opinion failed miserably. There were many lulls within the movie. At one point, I actually thought about walking out.

I can't believe they actually released this movie. Did they not watch it again themselves?

Will Ferrell, you have destroyed your magnum opus.

One of the finest examples of absurdist comedy since, well, the first Anchorman movie

[jmoney-2 · 9/10 · 14 January 2014]

We all know sequels are usually not as good as the original. But this is especially true when it comes to comedy sequels. A joke just isn't as funny the second time you hear it. Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues, proves the exception to the rule.

While the first film began as a send-up of local TV news in the '70s (and broadened out from there to include surreal battles with grizzly bears), the second installment starts as a parody of the early days of cable news. It picks up where the 2004 original left off, with Ron Burgundy (Will Ferrell) and wife Veronica Corningstone (Christina Applegate) anchoring a network newscast. When he's suddenly fired, and his wife is simultaneously promoted, Ron goes into a tailspin and lands back in San Diego as the emcee at a Sea World-like attraction. An offer from a start-up 24-hour news channel prompts him to get back in the news business, and he sets out to reassemble his old team: reporter Brian Fantana (Paul Rudd), sports anchor Champ Kind (David Koechner) and weatherman Brick Tamland (Steve Carell).

Ferrell and his co-writer (and frequent collaborator) Adam McKay -- who also directs the movie -- don't just recycle old jokes from the first film. Instead, they explore new comedic territory. We get to see how Ron behaves as a father as he tries to reconnect with his son following his split from Veronica. (Hint: it doesn't go smoothly.) There's also a great subplot this time around for Carell, as his dimwitted character finds love with an equally brainless co-worker (Kristen Wiig).

Ferrell and McKay also find much to parody when it comes to Ron's new medium. In one sequence, Burgundy – in a single hour-long newscast – invents every bad cable news cliché. Like the original, however, Anchorman 2 is not merely a news satire. It spends most of its time going off in several funny, unpredictable directions. I won't spoil any of the laughs or surprises, but two-thirds of the way through there's a twist that's not just out of left field, it's out of the parking lot behind the bleachers. You won't see it coming.

Anchorman 2 is one of the finest examples of absurdist comedy since, well, the first Anchorman movie. There are moments so hilariously bizarre, they would make the Monty Python troupe proud. It took nine years to bring this sequel to the screen. It was definitely worth the wait.

Uglier than the predecessor

[gianmarcoronconi · 7/10 · 14 August 2021]

This film is uglier than its predecessor and would only be watched for the final mega battalion among all the broadcasters, because that battle makes you laugh.

7.2...are you crazy?!

[bunzr · 1/10 · 31 December 2013]

The words escape me when it comes to reviewing this movie...before I start, you should know, i'm a massive comedy fan, and enjoyed the first anchorman quite a lot, and also that this is my first review because the disappointment and anger this movie caused made me have to write a review...this movie was the biggest waste of my time and money, and had I not been with company,I would've left half way through.

To be fair to the movie, the first 1 hour was okay, promising, and had a few laughs, but as the movie went on it descended into utter garbage, cheap humour and extremely drawn out scenes. The 'plot' was just...insane, I literally couldn't believe what I was watching, the movie was mainly just shouting and stupid noises, the same joke drawn out 100 times, no plot, no substance, no nothing. When I checked IMDb, I was honestly expecting to see somewhere between 3-4, I nearly fell out my seat when I saw 7.2, this movie probably would've made more sense if you cut up the scenes into a complete random order. Truly a 1/10 movie.

Burgundy On Crack

[AudioFileZ · 8/10 · 30 April 2014]

Read no further if you already know you're not a Will Farrell fan. This is like mega-Farrell as the entire movie is Farrell's brand of comedy - even when he's not on camera. But, if you think Farrell's brand of celebrating complete ignorance and buffoonery works then continue.

The story is the logical extension of Ron Burgundy. He's so bad he ends up at SeaWorld and is promptly fired there too due to some quite unacceptable behavior and "out-there" emceeing. The way of the Samurai follows and, of course, like everything else he doesn't quite "get it". Fate intervenes. A mogul, hilariously modeled after Richard Branson, is starting up a 24-hour news channel and wants Ron. This provides Farrell ample ground to plow, and plow he does. The absolutely most clue-less newscaster breathing becomes a major success in spite of himself. There's no rationale, just constant immature humor elevated to a kind of science. It could easily offend, but it doesn't because in its inaneness it rises up…and is funny and creative. Everything in culture is lampooned, sometimes so many in a scene that a second watch is even better.

So what makes Anchorman 2 work? After the obvious, Farrell, it's the writing and cast. Everything fits like a hand-in-glove. The old team with Paul Rudd, David Koecner, and Steve Carell is pure nonsensical magic. They're the perfect foils for Burgundy to bounce off of. There's a host of funny scenes with them all, but one of the best is when they're motoring to NYC in one of those iconic GM General motor homes. Ron has a slight misunderstanding of what exactly "cruise control" does and the slow-mo scene that results is high art without any dialog needed.

I know that so many just turn away from this stuff, especially when it is so over-the-top from beginning to end. For those of us who enjoy Farrell's shtick it's like golden nuggets that keep coming. Loosen up and laugh, it's painless until you double-over and gasp for that next breath. Oh yeah, I've got to mention the musical soundtrack…It's both campy as hell and pretty tasty at the same time and it is like another funny character thrown it for your enjoyment. For what it is this is crazy funny.

Enjoyable!

[hun_trq_ter · 7/10 · 4 August 2019]

It's fun to watch. The journalist fight scene could be way better I think.

Worst sequel in the history of sequels.

[travis-weed · 1/10 · 2 January 2014]

I am so glad I didn't have to pay to see this movie and I had a gift card instead. This movie was terrible to say the least. I had very high expectations for this movie because I was such a huge fan of the first Anchorman. It seemed like the entire movie was just made up on the spot and filmed and there was no rehearsing at all. I'm sure for a lot of people this was a highly anticipated movie and instead it was absolute crap. I have advised all of my friends to save their money for a better movie and rent it when it comes out if you must watch it. I definitely will not be buying this movie when it comes out. Very disappointed. Just do yourself a favor and go see Wolf of Wallstreet or something else. Worst Will Ferrell movie in a LONG time.

Benignly absurd and entertaining.

[JohnDeSando · 29 December 2013]

"I'm not trying to be funny, but are you sure he's not a midget with a learning disability?" Ron Burgundy (Will Ferrell)

When I realized Sacha Baron Cohen was playing a BBC reporter in Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues, I realized Will Ferrell and director Adam McKay were imitating Cohen's Borat from 7 years ago. "Imitation" in the sense that anything goes, especially political correctness being foolishness in the right comedic mouths, such as the quote above addresses little and mentally-challenged people while Burgundy references his own child.

Anchorman 2 beats comedies of 2013 by a length, even my favorites, The Internship and Identity Theft. If it's going to be funny, then best to go all out as Sacha and Ferrell do, where race relations and media harmony are decimated by exposing their inherent hypocrisy. On the world scene, Champ Kind (David Koechner) has the best line: "I believe in two things: Chicken, and that the census is a way for the UN to make your children gay."

But sometimes it's just low humor, for example as Ron says, "Who the hell is Julius Caesar? You know I don't follow the NBA!" or "I'm so lonely, I paid a hobo to spoon with me." What makes it funny is the sincerity with which Ron believes he is insightful when he really misses the whole point. Yet, he and the rest of his news team are actually likable so that the base humor comes off as nonsense rather than bigotry or worse, idiocy. When Ron exclaims, "By the hymen of Olivia Newton-John!" not only is the burst absurd, but it is also somehow dear.

"Absurd": That's what appeals to me. The utter foolishness captures cultural foibles while it entertains: In all sincerity Ron says, "The Tooth Fairy's exposed breast made the child uncomfortable." So much of what is said in this film is uncomfortable and hilarious at the same time. That's satire at its best.