Perfect cast and a good story

Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

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.

It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

1000% super comical. This film has it all. There's no lying I've watched it over and over and still want to watch it again. I like how Jacqouille messes up with everything along his way. One problem though is their medieval French that is quite hard to catch but this adds to the laughter as their obsolete Moliere slang blends funnily with modern French slang.My best part is where the duo steals a police van but don't know how to drive it, when Jacqouille accidentally disengages the handbrake, the vehicle races downhill and he keeps shouting at it like a horseman. The wedding reception is also one scene not to forget about. They spoil a party and spoil it again before continuing to spoil it.

Les Visiteurs, the first movie about the medieval time travelers was actually funny. I like Jean Reno as an actor, but there was more. There were unexpected twists, funny situations and of course plain absurdness, that would remind you a little bit of Louis de Funes.Now this sequel has the same characters, the same actors in great part and the same time traveling. The plot changes a little, since the characters now are supposed to be experienced time travelers. So they jump up and down in history, without paying any attention to the fact that it keeps getting absurder as you advance in the movie. The duke, Jean Reno, tries to keep the whole thing together with his playing, but his character has been emptied, so there's not a lot he can do to save the film.Now the duke's slave/helper, he has really all the attention. The movie is merely about him and his being clumsy / annoying / stupid or whatever he was supposed to be. Fact is; this character tries to produce the laughter from the audience, but he does not succeed. It is as if someone was telling you a really very very bad joke, you already know, but he insists on telling that joke till the end, adding details, to make your suffering a little longer.If you liked Les Visiteurs, do not spoil the taste in your mouth with the sequel. If you didn't like Les Visiteurs, you would never consider seeing the sequel. If you liked this sequel... well, I suppose you still need to see a lot of movies.

The second part of "les visiteurs" is worse than the first one,but it is not a reason for say that it is an awful film (I have watched worse film than this one)The film is similar than the other but with new a nice jokes,but the screenwriter would have done a better work.Jean Reno is a good actor (Leon is his best Role) but Christian Clavier get worse in "les visiteurs 2" because he uses the same way to do the jokes (In asterix he plays better) "Les visiteurs 2":Good film.

In 1993, "the visitors" was an enormous hit in France. So, the sequence was inevitable and unfortunately, this sequence ranks among the worst ones ever made. This is a movie that doesn't keep its promises. Indeed, it's supposed to tell a sole story. Jean Reno must go in the twentieth century and take Christian Clavier back in the Middle Ages so that time can normally follow its course. The problem is that Clavier feels completely at ease in the world of the twentieth century, and so make him get back in the Middles Ages is rather hard... Instead of this, the movie goes on several other stories without succeeding in following the main plot. As a consequence, the movie becomes sometimes muddle-headed, sometimes a bit of a mess.But the movie also suffers from the performance of nearly all the actors. Reno and Clavier fall into the trap that however they could avoid in the first movie: they're going over the top and become annoying. Then, why did Jean-Marie Poiré the film-maker engage Muriel Robin in the female main role? He made a mistake because she seems ill-at-ease and is absolutely pitiful. The other actors aren't better: Marie-Anne Chazel is nonexistent and Christian Bujeau, unbearable. Of course, the movie contains a few good moments with efficient gags but it often falls into vulgarity and easiness. Certain sequences and dialogs are affected. It also appears hollow because Poiré takes back elements that secured the success of the first movie. Thus, a young girl takes Reno for a close relative of her family and asks him to take part in her wedding.A labored and disappointing follow-up. Anyway, what's the interest of this movie otherwise commercial?