Antikiller 2: Antiterror (2003) User Reviews

Not as good as the first one...

[morfeus · 19 June 2004]

A few years ago "Antikiller" by Yegor Konchalovsky was a nice surprise for Russian audience worldwide, because it combined both Holywood-style filming and lots of Russian humor. But since then the creators wanted to make some extra money, so they came up with a sequel. Unlike the first part, the plot in Antikiller2 is less realistic and unoriginal - good guys fight terrorism. Still it displays how selfless actions of single officers are futile because of corruption in higher levels of command.It still has some humor, but it also has a lot of hidden advertisements, like Samsung cell phones, which are shown at lest 50 times during the movie. The movie has some morale, and the main idea is that fighting Chechen terrorists is useless unless the whole society fights the common enemy, however, the idea is not developed in the plot as good as it was in "Voina" or "Brat". 7/10.

Really Bad Movie, Promotes Terrorism and Portrays Terrorists as Heroes

[_Sergey_ · 2/10 · 18 May 2004]

This is one very disappointing movie! The director is too young; his work is amateurish, grotesque and very inexperienced. Lame camera work: these people tried to be original in their use of camera angles and camera movement. They really failed at both. The movie is hard to watch (literally bad for your eyes), all action sequences are hidden behind the jagged motion of the camera. Maybe they chose this filming style because the action sequences were badly engineered and directed, I do not really know.

The reason why I decided to write a review here is because of the plot and the idea carried by the movie. I suspect the budget for this film came from Chechen terrorists and their financiers. They make the terrorists into the real good guys and heroes, while between the lines they hint as at the idea that the law enforcement people and Russian state anti-terrorist groups are the true bad guys.

Obvious example: at the end (spoiler follows!) the main terrorist character completely overpowers and badly beats up the 'good guy', showing us that he really is the good guy and Chechens are better and stronger 'men' than Russians. The 'good guy' can take the terrorist out only with the help of a tricky disabled gun and a big truck. The director also highlights in the movie that Muslim terrorists do not support violence (the terrorist father disapproving the torture video of Christian people by Muslim mercenaries).

All in all, I was really disappointed in the movie. My advice: do not waste your money and time watching this flick.

Good movie, bad terrorists

[kroshka · 25 May 2004]

I disagree with the previous comment on all counts. First of all I like how the movie is shot, particularly the camera angles for the action scenes. It's a welcome change from the Hong Kong cliché which makes an emphasis on specific moves. Antikiller is not an instructional Martial Art video. But it's close-ups in my opinion more truly capture the atmosphere of the fight - this is what you'd see if you were in the midst of the action.

And secondly I am convinced that the movie movie is clearly anti-terrorist - it obviously portrays terrorists as criminals and savages. Yet it tries, and in my opinion succeeds, to paint the objective picture - there are different kinds of people in every group. There are corrupt police, patriotic thieves and non-criminal Chechens - fighters for idea. This is life. And if somebody expects good guys to win every fight - they should be watching cartoons. Personally I found the "happy end" in which both the main hero and his wife survive, to be the least realistic part of the whole move. I think that script writers needed it for a sequel.