Happy Gilmore 2 may have its moments, but the film buckles under the weight of a case of sequelitis. Happy Gilmore 2‘s Netflix release is finally here after an almost 30-year wait, with many eager to see how the golf pro’s journey continues. My review of Happy Gilmore proves I am one such person, given my enjoyment of the original.
I have a lot of nostalgia-led love for Happy Gilmore, and I was, well, happy to discover that the film holds up on rewatch. I have been cautiously optimistic about Happy Gilmore 2‘s story. I admit that Sandler’s comedic career since The Wedding Singer has included more misses than hits, but I hoped Happy Gilmore 2 would retain the endearing charm of its predecessor.
In some ways, the film does exactly that. Sadly, Happy Gilmore 2 suffers as it tries to be bigger and better than the first movie. This allows Happy Gilmore 2 to tread new ground, but it also makes it overly long, more unfocused, and more beholden to Happy Gilmore cameos.
Some aspects of Happy Gilmore 2 really work, but they are bogged down by a scatterbrained narrative that cannot match the first movie’s charm and wit.
Happy Gilmore 2’s Story Is Too Fractured
The Plot Isn’t Sure What To Focus On
Clocking in at almost 30 minutes longer than its predecessor, Happy Gilmore 2‘s biggest issue is its unfocused plot. The first act had me. The film establishes what Happy has been up to for the last three decades, setting up his family life until an incredibly shocking tragedy takes place.
Putting his daughter through ballet school became Happy’s goal, heartwarmingly replicating his motivation to save his grandma’s house…
It took me a while to come to terms with the unexpected plot point, but I very quickly realized its purpose was to drag Happy down before building him back up. Eventually, putting his daughter through ballet school became Happy’s goal, heartwarmingly replicating his motivation to save his grandma’s house in the first movie.
However, the movie’s second and third acts introduce the idea of Maxi Golf, a modernization of the sport. After this, the film becomes split between being a legacy sequel that repeats the first movie and a new take on traditionalism vs. innovation. Both have their merits and drawbacks, but Happy Gilmore 2 does not commit to either closely enough to feel coherent.
The family aspect of Happy Gilmore 2 does work, from the role of Vienna, played by Sandler’s daughter Sunny, to Happy’s four sons, who hilariously inherited his hockey player’s temper. Julie Bowen’s Virginia is underutilized, but there’s no denying her part as another motivation for Happy works to capitalize on the emotional nostalgia of the first film.
That said, true emotion is lacking because of the film’s focus on the Maxi Golf subplot. This plot has some good messaging, and the golf cameos add a nice traditionalist value, but it leads to the film’s biggest issue.
Happy Gilmore 2 Tries To Be Bigger Than Its Predecessor In Every Way
Only Adding To The Unfocused Narrative
Happy Gilmore 2‘s insistence on being a bigger sequel hinders it, with the Maxi Golf subplot epitomizing this. However, it is not the only way Happy Gilmore 2 tries to outdo the first movie, which is itself a problem. Happy Gilmore 2‘s level of cameos is genuinely baffling — from golf stars to comedic actors and musicians.
The cameos began to border on gratuitous…
Some of these cameos work, like Bad Bunny, but the sheer number of recognizable faces took me out of the movie and proved distracting. The cameos began to border on gratuitous, with so many of them — such as Austin Post’s commentator — being there simply for the sake of it.
Sadly, they detracted from Happy Gilmore 2‘s plot, which also tried to go bigger. The Maxi Golf tournament was fun in some ways, but the grandeur and spectacle of it did not fit the more grounded tone that Happy Gilmore 2 was striking via its family subplot.
I understand this was the point, as the maximalism of golf was pushed back against, but it was still too much and made Happy Gilmore 2‘s fractured narrative all the messier.
Happy Gilmore 2’s Nostalgia Works Well, But It Often Doesn’t Find A Reason For Existing
In terms of nostalgia for the first movie, there are some great moments in Happy Gilmore 2. The “return” of Gilmore’s caddie from the first movie, only this time as professional golfer Will Zalatoris, was hilarious and made for one of the film’s better cameos. Ben Stiller’s Hal L. was also suitably awful in the sequel, with his plot actually tying into Happy’s character arc quite nicely.
Most of the time, though, Happy Gilmore 2‘s nostalgia does not find a reason to exist; Chubbs’ son, played by Lavell Crawford, does not need to be in this movie at all, yet Happy Gilmore 2 insisted on it purely to have the connection to Carl Weathers’ character.
Christopher McDonald returns as Shooter McGavin and is excellent in his scenes. A graveyard fight makes for one of Happy Gilmore 2‘s funniest scenes and nostalgic gags, but McDonald suffers from the film’s fractured story. McGavin should’ve had a bigger role and, while he has his moments, is a wasted part of Happy Gilmore 2.
Overall, I wanted to love Happy Gilmore 2. Sadly, it is just fine at best. The film has some elements that work, but not enough to overcome its gratuitous cameos, its need to be bigger, or its wasted nostalgia and bloated runtime. Unfortunately, our lovable golfer may have been better off staying in retirement.
