why???(spoiler alert)

Rating: 5/10 (18 October 2012)

OK, so let me start by saying that the first film was one of those sleeper hits that come out once every 1 - 2 years, i thoroughly enjoyed it in the cinema, not knowing what i was expecting going in. The acting was solid, script good and some excellent action scenes.
This brings me on to Taken 2. Although the acting was nearly on a par with the first one, i felt that it lacked conviction. Some of the "Albanian" acting was questionable at best.
The action scenes seemed to want to impress while being lazy. How do grenades help work out distances/locations on a map??
Finally, my biggest problem with this film was its rating. Here in Ireland, the movie was released with a 12's certificate. I get the impression that the movie was seriously edited to obtain this certificate, it leaves the moving almost violence free and at times lacking understanding,(spoiler alert)for example, at the end when the main antagonist bites the bullet, it doesn't show how he dies, simply that Mills pushes him against a wall and then Game Over.
I'm afraid to say, this film sold itself out for that pre teens 12 rating, and in doing so, sacrificed its creditability.
An only average 5 stars from me, purely because Neeson was on board.