Please don't spend money on this.

It's complicated... I really like the directing, acting and writing but, there are issues with the way it's shot that I just can't deny. As much as I love the storytelling and the fantastic performance but, there are also certain scenes that didn't need to exist.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Rating-6/10Hamlet 2 is a comedy from one of the people behind comedies such as Team America and South Park: Bigger Longer & Uncut. Now it doesn't quite reach the heights that those two movies get to but nevertheless it doesn't fail to bring laughs and even just a little heart. Led by a strange casting choice, this small time kind of movie reminds me of a somewhat cult movie, that maybe in years to come or even already, is one.Now the strange casting choice is Steve Coogan who although is known for his comedy, just doesn't feel like a natural choice, but he does make his performance different. He really goes for the crazy, tries to hit the spot and kind of does, if only just scraping it. He makes the story fun, but the only things that hold this back from being any better is the writing, directing and even at times, Coogan. Now making a sequel to Hamlet in a comedy is a sure way to make it crude and hilarious, now although I didn't think this was hysterical, it has it's moments and is very crude. The writing can at times feel a little too lazy, it feels as if the writing team of Pam Brady and Andrew Fleming(also the director) fill in gaps with crude jokes where they can't think of anything good. Overall the movie plays a long nicely though and the directing is OK, to be fair the writing is too in most parts and I found the final scenes of the movie especially funny.A lot of credit has to go to the young cast who really give it a good go at playing teens who come together to make a play, now it may sound like a plot seen before and it is, but the emotion is pretty deep at times and certain actors know what there doing. I found the good mix of characters to play to this movies strengths, the supposed gang members mixed with the most drama loving students ever makes for good jokes and some good one two's at times.The movie is short, at 92 minutes this plays out nicely and doesn't overstep itself, that said it also can at times cram too much in and not explain but I'll overlook that in favour of the comedy. The little things are what makes this movie just about kind of OK(and I mean that, this is nearing just being average). The score is one thing that makes this good to watch, it isn't ever present but the odd bit of music here and there including some of the funny songs they sing make this movie come alive.Overall I have to repeat, this is near average and only escapes because of the humour and slight emotion which together create a kind of nice movie. Would I watch this again, well the answer is maybe, it is funny no doubt but for a second time this might not get the laughs it does first time around, so don't expect this to stick with you forever if you watch it. Last thing to say is about Coogan, he is hilarious at times and some of his other work is fantastic, now this won't go down in that list but he sure can be proud of making his character a different one, and not afraid to mix insane comedy with a little bit of pure drama.

First of all, I do think this is a funny idea, and I liked the parody of the "Teacher of the ghetto thugs" being parodied, and I certainly enjoy making fun of no-talent people who think they can put something great on, and it turns out to be unintentionally funny. So yes, this film is worth seeing.Regarding the "Rock Me Sexy Jesus" number. Okay, it is well done and potentially funny. Speaking as a practicing Unorthodox Catholic, I would like to offer something to the community of film makers: I know many of you enjoy being "cutting edge" by mocking Jesus Christ and those who worship Him (myself, for example). So in the spirit of giving and promoting that "cutting edge" vitality that you all want to provide: should any of you decide to make "Hamlet 3" "King Lear Returns" "Revenge of Macbeth" "Son Of Othello" or "Romeo & Juliet--Together Again" then I would like to provide you with some more cutting edge musical numbers.How about "Rock Me Sexy Mohammed" (See how well THAT goes over & show us how "edgy, hip and unafraid of controversy" you all truly are)! Or what about "Rock Me L. Ron Hubbard You Fabulous Fraud" (See if Hollywood is as open-minded about THAT one and how many stars will want to work with you in the future)! Maybe "Rock Me Horny Dr. Martin Luther King" ("He kicks racist ass and fights for your civil rights to plagiarize and cheat on your wives")! What about "Rock Me OBAMA" ("He'll close Gitmo but he won't...he'll end the wars but he don't...the Bush policies he'll rearrange but we simply call that 'Hope and Change'")! Do you like my ideas?:--) Yeah, that's what I thought. Why is it you people who talk about being "open-minded and progressive" don't feel the same way when YOUR values are being mocked? Is it because even the so-called "progressives" can be hypocrites too?

If anyone wonders how the choice of a director can affect a movie, look at "Hamlet 2." There's a lot of potentially funny material in this film, but director Andrew Fleming fails to cultivate much from it. There are a lot of directors that are hired because they are cheap, not because their style will bring anything unique to the film (some know them as "directors for hire"). However, looking at "Hamlet 2," it makes us realize that while they may not carry the weight of say, the Coen Brothers or Steven Spielberg, if they can make a good film they know what they're doing. However, the flip side is also true: a poor director can ruin a potentially good film.Dana Marschz (Steve Coogan) is a wannabe actor. Unfortunately, he is terrible at it, so in order to pay the bills, he has to take a job as a high school drama teacher. He sees this as an opportunity to "inspire" his students (insert reference to "Dead Poet's Society" here cause the movie's way ahead of you). However, save for his two suck-ups, no one pays attention. But when the School Board decides to cancel drama, he decides to write his own original play to save it. However, the new play causes a storm of controversy in Tuscon, Arizona (where the film is set).It's hard to address the acting when the director lets them down so much. Steve Coogan is an able comedian. He gives it his all, but his talents are wasted. Same goes for the rest of the cast, which includes Amy Poehler (in what is hardly larger than a cameo), Catherine Keener, David Arquette, and Elizabeth Shue (as Elizabeth Shue, playing off her real-life undeservedly lackluster career).In every way, Andrew Fleming fails as a director with this film. He doesn't know the concept of comic timing. He can't establish an even flow throughout the film. The film's plot is complex, and Fleming appears at a loss as to what to do with it all. Worst of all, he can't inject any life into it the film. Based on his resume, it's not especially surprising that the film is so lackluster (his past credits include "Dick," "The Craft," and "Nancy Drew." Let's hope Andrew Fleming doesn't ruin another film.

The biggest surprise of my weekend was Hamlet 2. It's a stupid concept that went all the way round back to genius again. Great movie. Hilarious performances from Steve Coogan, Catherine Keener and Elisabeth Shue. Clever when it needed to be, sincere at times, and out and out stupid-funny in the best way at other times.I guess a big concern with this movie is mindless vulgarity, which I personally have no problem with, but there's really none of that here. Sure, the main writer worked on South Park: Bigger Longer Uncut, and Team America - but Hamlet 2 has a lo more charm.I gave it a 9. It does what a comedy is supposed to do - made me laugh out loud several times!