August 2, 2013, - 8:02 pm

Weekend Box Office: 2 Guns

By Debbie Schlussel

It’s August, the pet cemetery where Hollywood sends all crappy movies to die. And that’s why this first August weekend of a very lackluster summer at the movies brings you “2 Guns” at the movies.


2 Guns is a hackneyed, predictable, cop buddy movie, and it’s not even as good as “Tango and Cash.” I felt like I was back in the ’80s, as it has the tired anti-American plot that used to populate such movies back then, in which the “evil” Reagan Administration’s CIA allowed drug dealers to fly drugs into America in exchange for pay-offs. Yes, no Reagan in this movie, but same difference (whether or not Obama is Prez, which isn’t referenced in this movie). It’s also got a stereotypical White South male (with a thick Southern accent, in case you didn’t get it) as its murderous CIA agent chief villain (Bill Paxton). Yup, same old yawnworthy Hollywood with its typical anti-American crap. No thanks. On, top of that, it’s extremely violent, bloody, and just unbelievable.

Oh, and add to that, a blatant statement on the “plight” of “poor” Mexican illegal aliens who are “forced” to smuggle themselves into the United States over harsh terrain at the border, while trying to evade the evil Border Patrol. Hey, just in time for amnesty. In one scene, a Mexican drug lord tells a DEA agent and US Army intelligence agent that they must go back to America “the way you force my people to go there.” Huh? We “force” illegal aliens to violate the law and sneak into our borders under cover of night? Thanks for the tip, Edward James Olmos (who plays drug kingpin Papi Greco).

The “story”: Denzel Washington is an undercover DEA agent trying to set up another guy (Mark Wahlberg) to rob a bank containing $3 million in drug money deposited by drug kingpin Olmos. Mark Wahlberg is an undercover U.S. Army intelligence agent trying to set up another guy (Washington) to do the same. Neither knows the other is an undercover agent, though they eventually find out. But not before they rob the bank and find over $43 million in the safety deposit boxes, not the $3 million. It turns out each has been set up and betrayed by his own agency and a corrupt DEA agent (Washington’s love, Paula Patton) and a corrupt Army commander (James Marsden) have been colluding with each other against them. Also, a vicious CIA agent, who is killing and torturing lots of people is looking for that money and plays Russian roulette on people’s crotches and knees. Or just kills them.

A couple other things: Wahlberg’s commanding officer told him to murder Washington, knowing he is a DEA agent, and then sets out to kill Wahlberg, too, to leave no witnesses. Wahlberg and Washington break into a military base, and Wahlberg gets to the base’s commanding officer to tell on his superior who set him up and ruined his military career. But the commanding officer tells him he won’t help because it will make the Army look bad. Yup, another anti-military movie by Hollywood. Shocker. Both Wahlberg and Washington have been to visit troops overseas (with Washington also giving a lot of money to help our wounded warriors), and it’s kinda hypocritical when they then turn around and make this kind of crap. Connect the dots, guys.

I just can’t recommend this movie. And, so, for the reasons given, I give it . . .


Watch the trailer . . .

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

29 Responses

Terrific review, Debbie! You picked out every single important liberal bias in this film and articulated your case brilliantly.

I’ll just add to what you said that the two volunteer border guards were portrayed as foolish buffoons, and we the audience are expected to laugh when Washington pulls a gun on them and puts them in their place.

I’ll also add that in this movie, the CIA is not only depicted as simply corrupt (because they demand a drug-import fee from the Mexican cartels as you correctly point out), but in addition the CIA agent is played as a monster and sociopath who shoots innocents in the knees for little reason and terrorizes everyone he meets. There are no good guys in the story, but some are more evil than others, and the CIA is depicted at the very bottom of the barrel. This is all in line with the transformation that we’ve seen in the Bourne movies. At first (in the Bourne movies) the CIA was shown as merely having corrupt pockets due to one or two greedy bad apples. Gradually, though, over the series, the entire CIA was demonized.

Burke on August 3, 2013 at 11:01 am

I am encouraging every reader of Debbie’s column to not only boycott every Hollywood movie, but to tell your friends to boycott Hollywood, and to have them tell their friends. This is the only way Ho-wood is going to change. Aren’t you people tired of all of these anti-West, Anti-American, and yes, even anti-Semitic movies? Do something about it.

Jonathan E. Grant on August 3, 2013 at 11:45 am

    Jonathan, I totally understand and get your passion, however at the sametime (agree to disagree with on this as well dude) I really wouldn’t be calling for boycotts, I learned that if you boycott people, businesses, etc., it’ll get you nowhere in life and also folks won’t take you seriously.

    Here’s my solution regarding Hollywood, if you don’t like the stuff there putting out (I do agree with DS and everyone here that Hollywood does put out mediocre crap that spouts the left wing hidden agenda of anti-Americanism, anti-Western World, etc.), don’t and no longer invest in their stock(s), hit them where it really hurts, “financially” from that perspective, in which they’ll lose tons of money until they get their act together and quit pushing a hidden agenda that favors not only the left wing alone, but also the right wing as well.

    “A nation is defined by its borders, language & culture!”

    Sean R. on August 3, 2013 at 4:54 pm

      Plenty of other people will buy the movie stocks; however, if people stop going to the movies, the movie industry will be forced to produce a better product.

      At one time, there were good movies in differenct genres like Patton, Mary Poppins, One Potato, Two Potato, To Kill a Mockingbird), Mickey Marcus, Exodus, almost any Humphrey Bogart movie, the Godfathers I and II, and Jaws. Now we have…garbage.

      Jonathan E. Grant on August 3, 2013 at 8:17 pm

        JEG, you make a lot of sense as usual. I agree with refusing to go to any movies until a better product is churned out. I already have a ton of celebs I will never watch, buy a ticket to.
        Debbies taste in movies is pretty close to my own and I do save a bunch of money not checking the stupid or offensive ones out.

        samurai on August 4, 2013 at 10:44 am

Cute but no cigar. I’m predicting a flop.

Frankz on August 3, 2013 at 12:39 pm

Another anti American and probably also anti-white as usual. Yes BOYCOTT ALL MOVIES COMING FROM HOLLYWOOD.

Fred on August 3, 2013 at 2:15 pm

DIE all you Hollywood scum commie fag producers. May your loser movies pile up into 1 giant dung heap that they are.

bobby99 on August 3, 2013 at 2:24 pm

The first paragraph of 2 Guns review? That is EXACTLY why I can’t stand it when people complain that “they don’t make them like they used to”. It’s not the real problem.

The real problem is that the movies being made are largely
-mediocre crap that is a warmed over version of the better crap from before
-rehashing of the worst crap from before
– Sequel/remake crap that usually features the aforementioned crap
-crap that is trying to push the envelope in “novel” directions (sex, drugs, violence)

If the problem was genuinely that “they don’t make them like they used to”, then a remake of the Ma and Pa Kettle films (there were 10 of them, 1947-1957) would be critical and commercial winners. Or more recently, how about some of those successful Ernest P. Worrell movies?

If the problem was genuinely “they don’t make them like they used to”, then Debbie’s first paragraph of 2 Guns’ “virtues” (hackneyed, predictable, felt like I was back in the 80s) would be selling points.

One of the biggest (non-political) causes for the decline of movies is that most of the best writers today working in Hollywood are in television instead of movies. After all, movies are a huge crap shoot that can either soar or crash once completed, but a TV show offers steady work, as well as the ability to really flesh out characters and stories for those who are genuinely in the trade for creative satisfaction.

More immediate accountability in the form of advertiser retention and ratings nips most crap shows in half a season (sadly not true of most reality/unscripted programs), while middling or successful performance allows those with genuine potential to retool problem areas and further develop strengths. Imagine how good Stealth(2005) might have been if we had seen the first 30 minutes before they filmed the rest of that abysmal failure?

Consider the number of movies from TV shows that have come out in just the past decade or so: Bewitched, 21 Jump Street, A-Team, Aqua Teen Hunger Force,Avatar: The Last Airbender, Firefly, Fat Albert, Get Smart, GI Joe (mostly a toy, but still a show), Hannah Montana, Jacka$$ (spawned 3 movies…ugh), The Honeymooners, Land of the Lost, The Lone Ranger (currently one of the biggest flops ever, and likely to finish in the top 10), Miami Vice, Reno 911!, Saturday Night Live (most recently MacGruber, but 11 movies come from SNL skits), Sex and the City ( a double dose of “Three hookers and their mom”), Star Trek, Transformers, and X-Files. And that’s omitting most of the pediatric properties. It’s only a matter of time before Grey’s Anatomy, Friends, and Frasier grace the silver screen.

We all know Hollywood keeps going to the well of Other Successes instead of making its own blockbusters, but looking at the numbers in recent years…it’s like the difference between knowing Previously Promising Child Actress has turned into a mess, and seeing her OD on the floor of a filthy Turkish prison cell with a tampon up her nose to stem the bleeding.

The best solution Hollywood can invest in is bringing genuinely creative-driven people back into the fold. Because the problem in part IS making them like they used to, it’s the absence of a genuine creative spark, a Flash of Genius (which tangentially, was a pretty decent movie).

Robert on August 3, 2013 at 4:52 pm

    Most interesting.

    Incidentally, are Robert and Robert A. the same person?

    skzion on August 4, 2013 at 11:44 am

Action movies like this scarcely have a believable plot – it doesn’t matter cuz the action is the draw.

And usually the good guy always win at the end – and gets the woman, too.

NormanF on August 3, 2013 at 6:31 pm

Denzel is another “Black Hole” actor – he sucks all of the energy and life out of every scene. It’s like the movie suddenly goes into stop-motion tedium while his issues precede him like a giant, invisible entourage.

DS_ROCKS! on August 3, 2013 at 7:50 pm

    DSR, that was very artfully written. Truly you left your heart in San Francisco.

    I won’t even rent a movie with DW in it, partly for that reason.

    skzion on August 4, 2013 at 11:51 am

Debbie, Mr. Grant, Robert,

Yes I’m tired of these type of motion pictures that are being produced and distributed to the American movie viewing public. However the target audience are not people in their 40-60’s, the target audience are people in the 18-30 age group. It has been apparent that Hollywood has a leftist political agenda which supersedes any creative, decent, (Or Original) films which do not attempt to manipulate audience’s minds however subtle in the favor of the Marxist political agenda.

Peter on August 3, 2013 at 8:10 pm

I had that year Challenger back in the day (’77)
And who sings that version of Jimi’s “Along the watchtower”?
Badass remake of the song.

I trust Debbie’s movie previews,but after watching the trailer,I have to say I enjoyed it (the trailer)

Having said that though,most trailers are misleading.

ebayer on August 3, 2013 at 8:56 pm

Debbie saves a lot of us money by telling us how shitty most of these movies are.

RT on August 3, 2013 at 11:10 pm

It does look like a throwback film. I suspect that it will do well in third world markets.

Worry01 on August 4, 2013 at 2:26 am


Let me say that I enjoy your reviews. I don’t always agree with you but you are one of the few sites where a person can see movies reviewed where the Leftist content of the film is laid out. That’s important to me as I hate the Left and some of their ideas/values are so repugnant that paying money to sit through one of these propaganda pieces is pure torture. Your reviews allow me to know which films have Leftist content that I just can’t sit through.

jack on August 4, 2013 at 1:56 pm

How about “Cockneys versus Zombies?” Debbie? I heard that it’s good—I’d like your take on it.

Occam's Tool on August 5, 2013 at 1:46 am

Cynicism isn’t criticism, and this review has the former in spades. I base my cinema-going solely on my better instincts, not on “infallible” authority, papal or otherwise. At any rate, this year has brought terrific fare such as: The Great Gatsby; The Place Beyond the Pines; The East; Fast and Furious 6 (great populist filmmaking and don’t anyone tell you otherwise); Emperor; Frances Ha; Gangster Squad; Superman (more great populist filmmaking), Iron Man 3; and Admission. If these films qualify as “crappy” or “anti-American,” then let’s have more.

Seek on August 5, 2013 at 11:56 am

I don’t have much of a problem with the remakes. A lot of Hollywood’s older movies were remakes, adaptations, ripoffs or highly formulaic anyway. Hollywood’s main problem is that the independent film nonsense that the media, critics and a lot of the actors and directors and film schools promoted in the 1980s and early 90s (because Hollywood and the media wanted to propagandize against the Reagan era) has infected Hollywood to the point where no one knows how to make a mainstream movie or TV series with broad appeal anymore, especially if it is a comedy or drama. It used to be if a project didn’t attack and alienate – excuse me, “challenge” – a significant segment of the population, a lot of writers, directors and certain actors would proudly reject it. Now the problem is Hollywood is having the opposite problem – badly needing projects that have broad appeal – and doesn’t know how to make them. Not only has that made the independent film thing (which was mostly hype and a scam anyway … a lot of them were either just B-movies or exploitation movies with leftist politics, and the rest were just vanity projects for the people who made them) even more garbage than it was because now there aren’t any more “mainstream, commercial” movies and TV shows for them to rebel against but it forces them to go back to properties that existed while Hollywood was still mainstream to generate cash. So it isn’t the lack of original ideas. It is that the original ideas stink because everyone aspires to be a Steven Soderbergh/Quentin Tarantino/Ang Lee/Martin Scorcese/Joel and Ethan Coen wannabe. Being a John Hughes, Paul Verhoeven or Lawrence Kasdan (who in addition to directing good movies like Silverado also wrote “Raiders of the Lost Ark” and “The Empire Strikes Back”), Walter Hill, Richard Donner or John McTiernan (The Hunt For Red October, Die Hard, Predator, the last Robin Hood film to actually make money) would get you reviled by the Hollywood mainstream today.

Best example: where Kathryn Bigelow is now an indie darling for having made “The Hurt Locker” and “Zero Dark Thirty” she was actually at her best making mainstream movies like “Blue Steel” and “Point Break.” If Hollywood were to make “Point Break” today, the FBI agents would be bumbling, corrupt, racist drug dealing rapists and the bank thieves would be suave, intelligent, cool anti-heroes who make leftist soliloquies.

I still say that the best response to stuff like this is for conservatives to get into the screenwriting and producing business. There honestly are a lot of apolitical stars out there who wouldn’t turn down a conservative movie. Also a lot of folks who – whatever their politics – just want good projects to work in, especially those that would give them a chance to play a lead role or a chance to direct. Shane Black, the guy who just directed Iron Man 3, for example, had been out of work for years before Robert Downey Jr. was able to convince Disney/Marvel to let him direct Iron Man 3 in return for his promise to appear in “Avengers 2” (yet another example of why anyone who thinks that Hollywood is a meritocracy is nuts … it is all about who you know – and who you are related to – in that town). Walden Media would gladly adapt any GOOD screenplay that they get into a movie; the problem is the lack of good conservative screen plays and the lack of writers willing to produce them.

Gerald on August 5, 2013 at 1:29 pm

Just like the allah/mohammed thing, I sure wish you’d add “academy award winner” (with an asterisk) every time you mention Denzel Washington.

Cos, you know, he really earned it for that laughable cop flick.

Dan Diego on August 8, 2013 at 10:16 pm

Another example of a pretentious blogger. It’s Navy Intelligence in the movie. Not Army.

Bobby Beans on August 26, 2013 at 5:08 am

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field