★★☆☆☆
THE first Super Troopers, made way back in 2001 by the stubbornly daft comedy troupe Broken Lizard, was far from a mainstream smash comedy hit. Instead it has found its snug little home in cult comedy status where those in on the joke happily revel in its buffoonery as everyone else is undoubtedly left baffled.
Now, thanks to the modern magic of crowd-funding, we’ve got a sequel that for some is long-awaited and for others has come out of nowhere.
Either way it provides a lacklustre excuse for a follow-up that lazily rehashes jokes and ends up standing in the modest shadow of its predecessor.
The gang of clownish state troopers are all back but we catch up with them having been dismissed with the force because of a mysterious incident involving a once famous celebrity.
For contrived reasons, the group is presented with the prospect of reinstatement.
But they’ll have to prove themselves on an assignment that sees them take over from a group of Canadian Mounties on the other side of the border in a town that is soon to be rezoned as part of the US.
As the gang get up to their usual shenanigans involving prank one-upmanship, outlandish bets and messing around with the reputations of the local law enforcement, who obviously don’t take too kindly to them being there, they uncover a smuggling conspiracy and do their best to expose the culprit.
Anyone who either didn’t know of the first one or simply didn’t care will find nothing real of value here – this is strictly made for those with fond memories of the last one’s illicit substance-fuelled tomfoolery. But the trouble is that even on that modest, nostalgia based level it fails to cut the mustard.
It’s safe to say neither the characters nor the humour has grown up in those 17 years. It aims firmly below the belt, and that can be fine if done well, but it never really has the guts to truly follow through on its foul-mouthed gags, banging the tired drum of making a fool of Canadian accents, or the fact they use the metric system, and incessantly throwing at us OTT set-pieces that lack much wit and imagination.
Too often it comes down to it simply mistaking call-backs to lines from the first film for genuine, laugh-out-loud hilarity.
That’s not to say it’s completely laugh-free – the fast gag rate means one or two hit the mark.
But they’re so disappointingly few and far between in a comedy sequel that feels at best half-baked. You end up wondering what the point was of resurrecting the idea at all.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here