This is my first time reviewing, I'm no cinephile, I have also not read the books nor have I watched Carlito's Way with Al Pacino (I will soon though), so I won't be too analytical nor will I compare it to previous material.
I still think, with my basic knowledge and my observations both from the movie and from some reviews, that its average of a 5/10 is deserved and that when the first film is so monumental, this was probably unnecessary.
The first 25 minutes were just wrong for me. They were just very mediocre, both when it came to the plot and everything and when it came to how the movie itself and the scenes were made. If it kept going like this I'd give a 4/10. It wasn't horrible but it was just mediocre. After that it kind of grows on you and it just becomes more like a normal/meh movie that you can keep watching. Not all scenes are uninteresting, some are decent, and sometimes it sucked cause there was potential with some acting for example or just the vibes so I knew that if things were done differently then maybe a different movie would perform better. Also, it's only 1.5 hour, so if you view it as a standalone film about some criminal businessmen in NY in the 60s then maybe you can say "eh, it's fine". Taking into account the above & its role as a prequel to something greater & the rankings on here and how stuff like "10" should mean "masterpiece", I think a 5 is suitable. The limits for me are 4-6. It's okay if you watch it to pass some time, but it also doesn't matter much either.
