When I heard the news of “Happy Gilmore 2” releasing on Netflix this summer, my first thought, naturally, was: Hollywood is still beating a dead horse. Why wouldn’t I? From the number of prequels, sequels, reboots, and remakes being made, it’s clear that originality is on its decline. So, with that active bias in mind, I watched it, and I immediately hated it. All I could say was that I wished Adam Sandler had just left it in the ’90s. However, as time passed— and as I read various Letterboxd reviews — my opinion shifted, and my perspective on the film changed entirely.
The “Happy Gilmore” movies tell the story of an aspiring hockey player named Happy Gilmore. After various failures, he later takes on golf and discovers a natural talent. Bringing his hockey player personality and golfing skills, he revitalized the sport’s popularity, later becoming one of the best golfers of his time.
Its successor follows Gilmore as a drunk middle-aged dad who gave up on golf after killing his wife with a tee-drive. He is later forced to redeem himself in a round of Maxi Golf, created by the movie’s antagonist, Frank Manatee. Maxi Golf is Manatee’s creation, aiming to make a name for itself as a golf revolutionary by combining mini-golf-style obstacles with traditional golf. When Gilmore turns down an endorsement with Maxi Golf, Manatee is determined to prove him wrong, which sets the movie into motion. As one can infer from this description, this film’s plot is certainly whip-lash inducing.
My first mistake when stepping into this movie was expecting it to live up to the first. I went in with predisposition, and I took it too seriously. At first, watching this movie felt like pulling teeth: countless unfunny gags made by Gen Xers trying to appeal to Millennials, while also trying to attract Gen Zers with Bad Bunny and Travis Kelce. Those involved in this movie, like many others, overlooked the fact that there is an entirely new generation of viewers and ultimately failed to incorporate their perspectives into the creative process, resulting in gaps in comedic relatability. Truthfully, watching this movie wasn’t even cringey; it was just embarrassing. So, after skipping through probably 20 minutes of the film when I got bored, I immediately went to Letterboxd and rated it 2.5 stars, and then read the short quip reviews below. That’s when it changed. Some reviews absolutely hated it, giving it a 1-star rating, but then a 5-star review caught my eye. It read “Happy Gilmore 2 is like a love letter to the first,” and that’s when I finally got it.
“Happy Gilmore 2” is not meant to be the movie of the summer, and it certainly wasn’t made to be an Oscar-winning film; it simply was a means of closure for those involved. This movie helped me understand that sometimes it really isn’t that deep. Sometimes, perfection isn’t the goal, and often it’s more important just to have fun. People can criticize this movie all they want, but in the end, it isn’t intended to be great. While it may not live up to the “so bad it’s good” title, it can definitely be entertaining if you go into it with these understandings.
While it was obvious that the producers used big names in the industry to entice younger viewers to watch, I have to admit that it was effective. I was always going to watch this sequel, seeing as I loved the original, but a huge reason why I can reflect on this movie and say positive things about it is, for one, the casting. Bad Bunny is undoubtedly a fan favorite: a rap singer who made his film debut in the hit movie “Bullet Train,” featuring Brad Pitt. Bad Bunny is a severely underrated actor, considering his limited acting experience. Playing a bumbling server turned caddy in “Happy Gilmore 2,” he brought a sense of real, non-cringey comedy to each scene he was in, and I can’t wait to see him in more movies in the future.
The juxtaposition of the actors can also be enjoyable: you have the outright insufferable antagonists, whose every word makes you want to sigh, and the relatable protagonists who are equally as annoyed as the viewer. That sense of connection between the viewer and the leads makes you feel like you’re not alone in your disenjoyment. This tells the brain that the bad jokes are really intentional, which can spin your overall perception of the movie, like I had. With all things considered, between casting choices and character relatability, the more time that passes, the more you grow to like “Happy Gilmore 2” with all of its second-hand embarrassing moments and bad jokes included.
All in all, now that a few months have passed since its release, I can conclude that “Happy Gilmore 2” is not that good, and I’ll likely never watch it again, but that doesn’t mean I didn’t like it. This movie was a net positive for me, and I hope it was for others who watched it as well. Everything in this movie is purposeful: from the obviously horrible jokes to the random celebrity casting, it helped me appreciate movies again. Directors and producers in Hollywood are constantly trying to make the movie of the year, and viewers have been accustomed to high expectations given that promise, to their inevitable disappointment.
“Happy Gilmore 2” revives the concept of having fun, a lesson that can be applied to everyone, including me, who initially disliked the film. Ultimately, if “Happy Gilmore 2” taught me anything, it’s that it’s really never that serious.
