T2 Trainspotting Review

R:  Drug Use, Language Throughout, Strong Sexual Content, Graphic Nudity and Some Violence 

Tristar Pictures, Film4, Creative Scotland

1 Hr and 57 Minutes

Cast: Ewan McGregor, Ewen Bremner, Jonny Lee Miller, Robert Carlyle

REVIEW: In 1996, Danny Boyle hit it big into the scene with Trainspotting, a revolutionary film for anyone who ever took drugs and needed to get off. Seriously, when I watched this film several months ago, I was scarred for life. If you have a child who’s in their 20s and is on the verge of becoming a junkie, Trainspotting was that scared straight movie to get them off of drugs. It had good humor, an odd narrative, and enough visually stylistic flair to make you never want to snort, inject, smoke anything ever [again]. Now, 21 years later, Danny Boyle is back to his roots with a sequel to the film that put him on the map and arguably one of his best films. Even Boyle admitted that adapting Irving Walsh’s second Transpotting book, Porno was going to be hard. In the vein of sequels nobody asked for, T2 Trainspotting may be the sequel that was worth waiting for.

First, there was an opportunity......then there was a betrayal. Twenty years have gone by. Much has changed but just as much remains the same. Mark Renton (Ewan McGregor) returns to the only place he can ever call home. They are waiting for him: Spud (Ewen Bremner), Sick Boy (Jonny Lee Miller), and Begbie (Robert Carlyle). Other old friends are waiting too: sorrow, loss, joy, vengeance, hatred, friendship, love, longing, fear, regret, diamorphine, self-destruction and mortal danger, they are all lined up to welcome him, ready to join the dance.

THE GOOD: What I love about sequels that take place in the future is seeing all these characters live out these lives and seeing the occupations that they do. And for the most part, these bastards are still taking drugs, but they’re not doing the same thing as before. 

The movie is incredibly funny but at the same time deep and emotional. It balances a perfect tone where it feels just right when it feels funny and feels right when it gets dark and sad. John Hodges, the screenwriter of the original film, brings in his own screenplay that is a bit of both books, but in the end, makes it his own story. The beauty of this story is that there is nothing really going on except characters going through their mid-life crisis. In ’96 these guys were young and full of life. It's 2017, now that life is rather depressing. Its Hodges and Boyle’s off-screen chemistry that helps brings these characters back to life. This was the reason I loved last years’ Bridget Jones’s Baby which was because it was director Sharon Maguire’s reunion with the characters and these actors bringing out nothing but their best.

The original cast is back and displays nothing but great performances. Everyone could agree thatEwen Brenner was everyone’s favorite in the group for his character Spud was the baby of the group. He was the baby for everyone. When I see Ewan McGregor, Jonny Lee Miller, and Robert Carlyle, I don’t see Obi-Wan Kenobi or Sherlock Holmes or Rumplestiltskin I see Rent Boy, Sick Boy, and Begbie. Because they are in their 40s and 50s they refer to each other by their first names than nicknames which are both genuine and mature. These actors bring these characters back and know how to perfectly portray them the same way as we saw them in ’96. They never do anything out of character and in with who they are. No, they aren’t likable people, but you already knew this since 96’. It is their chemistry and charm that each character inherits that makes this film special. Watching everyone reunite is like seeing friends you didn’t see in 20 years and you unexpectedly realize how much you miss them. Renton, Spud, Simon, they’re the Scottish Three Musketeers. 

THE BAD: The film tries to tell us everything that happened in the first film for people who are unfamiliar with the first, but relies so much on callbacks that it's confusing. It sucks because, in a full theater, I was the only guy who laughed at all the callbacks and references to the first film. Screw the people who didn’t watch the first film, you don’t have to kneel down to them. If you didn’t watch Trainspotting but want to watch T2, GO WATCH THE ORIGINAL BECAUSE MOST OF THE HUMOR ARE CALLBACKS TO THE FIRST!

As I said earlier, story wise there is nothing going on (mainly for the first hour), but you really can’t complain about the film’s narrative because of Boyle’s direction and stylistic visuals that keep you entertained. It is damn near close to juggling keys in front of a baby’s face. A baby won’t complain because it's so fascinating like watching this movie. You can’t complain about the narrative because Boyle’ visuals are so fascinating. What makes up for the narrative lull is Danny Boyle’s distinct visuals. From great camera angles to fluorescent lighting to cool swish pans to cutaways that display whatever a character is speaking is talking about to trippy visuals that have subtle subtext. It's very similar to Edgar Wright’s Scott Pilgrim style of filmmaking all its just missing is the quick shots.

LAST STATEMENT: Choose movies. Choose book adaptations. Choose sequels that don’t give a fuck. Choose sequels that do give a fuck. Choose sequels with 20-year time gaps. Don’t choose Independence Day: Resurgence or Dumb and Dumber To. Choose sequels directed by Danny Boyle for he knows what the hell that he’s doing. Choose screenplays written by John Hodges who knows these characters and love them. Choose sequels with the return of an iconic cast emotional depth, a humorous script, and visual eye candy from beginning to end. Choose T2 Trainspotting, a sequel that nobody asked for but one that was worth waiting for.

Rating: 3.5/5 | 78%

Super Scene: Choose Life 2017 Edition

Pros	Cons
Danny Boyle Visuals	Lack of Narrative
John Hodges Emotional Screenplay	Unnecessary Cutaways
Original Cast Bringing Back Charisma and Charm
Story Kicks in By the Hr Mark