_"It's like when my nephew loses a soccer game. I wanna give you a hug and a Capri Sun."_

I enjoyed the first one more. By all means, that's likely not the majority opinion. This film seemed to turn the dial of humor up, and the dialogue seemed more humor-oriented than in the first film; not only that, the overall scope of it came across as broader, likely due to a bigger budget. And I was right: looking at the budgets of both films, the first one was $25 million, and this one was $40 million.

But I still enjoyed the first one more. This one wasn't bad: no way; I was just as entertained. I just, for some reason, found the first one to be more enjoyable. And honestly? I couldn't tell you why. As I said, everything about this film screams 'sequel even better.' So, I have no excuses. I don't even think it's a matter of this one not delivering (as much), but simply due to personal opinion with no explanation.

The additions of Olivia Munn and Ken Jeong were good. They brought some extra entertainment value and individuality to the film compared to the first and were way better than Bryan Callen and John Leguizamo. But the crystal clear stand-out was Benjamin Bratt. His performance was captivating, and his charisma was palpable. No disrespect to Laurence Fishburne (more known with a greater résumé), but he was underwhelming in the first film. Benjamin is the superior antagonist.

And Kevin Hart brought more to his performance as Ben Barber in this film than in the first one. He was more active and expressive with it. That (and specific moments with him) played a big part in this film's entertainment, more so than in the previous one. Just like with the humor/comedy being more prominent this time. Saying I liked the first one more is starting to seem inaccurate now. Despite having more memorable moments, including more 'moments' in the first place, I guess I just enjoyed the first one _as a whole_ more than this one.

Two other aspects that elevated the film were the soundtrack and the cinematography. Because of the higher budget (and the work by Mitchell Amundsen, of course), the cinematography had more opportunities to be good, depending on the utilization, which was a success. But the soundtrack was the better of the two.

Compared to the first film, this one didn't necessarily bring anything new to the table, not that it should've. Don't try changing what already works/worked. Right? Both films were incredibly successful, box office-wise. The biggest draw is the chemistry between Ice Cube and Kevin Hart, so as long as that's still there, there isn't "a point" in trying to bring something new to the table. I get that. And while that did somewhat make the film itself pointless (because of being essentially the same as the first one with "new" stuff happening), it still served its purpose as entertainment.