Frank Drebin (Leslie Nielsen) embraces Jane Spencer (Priscilla Presley) as she shapes pottery in a studio
Film review

The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear

1991 · Directed by David Zucker · 1h 25m

In a sentenceLeslie Nielsen looks as though he has never heard a dirty joke, including the one he has just told

Lt. Frank Drebin (Leslie Nielsen) is at the centre of this crime comedy, with Jane Spencer (Priscilla Presley), Ed Hocken (George Kennedy) and Nordberg (O. J. Simpson) among the principal characters. Robert Goulet plays Quentin Hapsburg, while Richard Griffiths takes the roles of Dr. Meinheimer / Earl Hacker. Commissioner Brumford (Jacqueline Brookes) and Hector Savage (Anthony James) also feature. David Zucker directs from a script he writes with Pat Proft, with Ed Williams appearing as Ted Olsen and Lloyd Bochner as Baggett.

Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.

Fi1m review

Leslie Nielsen’s solemn stupidity keeps this uneven sequel funny even when the jokes look second-hand. The slapstick is overworked and the surprises are fewer, but there is enough good nonsense to justify 85 minutes.

The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear is funny enough to recommend to anyone with a taste for straight-faced foolishness. David Zucker directs with the sensible understanding that Leslie Nielsen need only believe what he is saying for much of this to work. The sequel asks more of that performance than it should, and a fair number of jokes arrive looking used. Its reliance on familiar routines becomes harder to overlook whenever the physical comedy takes over.

Leslie Nielsen plays Lt. Frank Drebin with such undisturbed conviction that he appears entirely unaware of his own stupidity. He is not waiting for permission to be funny, and he does not seem to hear the nonsense in his own words. His composure is particularly useful when the sexual jokes grow laboured; a knowing glance would make them harder to bear. The performance gives even weak material a chance, though some of it requires more assistance than any actor can provide.

David Zucker and Pat Proft write as though a failed joke can always be repaired by the next one, which is a serviceable policy rather than a guarantee. We laughed at the pottery-scene parody of Ghost, because the earnestness surrounding the vulgarity is so disproportionate. There is something recognisable there for the silliness to interrupt, and the scene benefits from having that starting point. Other sexual jokes seem satisfied merely to have mentioned sex, and those need considerably more help from the actors.

Robert M. Stevens’s cinematography helps by keeping a sober appearance. The pictures give the performers room to be ridiculous without making the comedy feel visually frantic. John J. Lloyd’s production design has a similarly useful air of respectability, although it seldom feels distinctive in itself. Both contributions suit a spoof that depends on its surroundings looking more sensible than the people occupying them.

Editors James R. Symons and Christopher Greenbury keep the film moving, but speed cannot make every pratfall worth keeping. The physical comedy is where the repetition grows most wearing: another tumble can feel like an instruction to laugh harder at something that did not quite work before. Ira Newborn’s music understands the value of playing this sort of nonsense seriously. The score’s conviction helps, although there are stretches when a little less insistence from the film would have been welcome.

The supporting cast does not get an equal share of the useful material. Priscilla Presley’s Jane Spencer is less rewarding company than Lt. Frank Drebin, and the stiffness that helps him can make her scenes feel slow. Yet her reluctance to chase a laugh belongs in this sort of comedy; replacing it with busy mugging would hardly solve the problem. George Kennedy, as Ed Hocken, offers a firmer supporting presence, but Leslie Nielsen remains the main attraction.

Against the standards of broad slapstick, this is efficient work with less surprise than we would like. The complaint that the formula is wearing thin is fair, especially whenever a physical gag is repeated past its useful life. At 85 minutes, though, it does not ask us to live with those weaknesses for long. Choose it for Leslie Nielsen, and be prepared to wait through a few jokes that he cannot rescue.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

58
Positive
3
Mixed
2
Negative
2

The reviews are divided on The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear, with praise centring on its relentless silliness, Leslie Nielsen’s performance and individual spoofs rather than any advance on the formula. The New Yorker finds Nielsen’s earnest obliviousness enough to make recycled material work. The parody of the pottery scene from Ghost earns approval even from Variety, which otherwise finds the sequel less funny than its predecessor. Admirers enjoy the tasteless jokes and comic chaos on their own terms.

The disagreement is substantial: what delights some critics strikes others as repetition without enough invention. Reservations cluster around diminished surprise, juvenile humour and the effort required to secure a laugh. Even reviews that find it funny acknowledge signs of wear. The Los Angeles Times takes the sharpest opposing view, finding little laughter in the sex jokes, non sequiturs and pratfalls, and missing the original’s exuberance.

The New Yorker
21 July 1991 · Terrence Rafferty
85*

Rafferty gives the film an enthusiastic verdict, finding its low-rent, joke-packed approach winning. He particularly praises Leslie Nielsen’s performance, whose earnest, oblivious lunacy turns recycled material into comic alchemy.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★★ · Alan Jones
80

Jones calls the sequel a deliriously funny delight. He singles out its send-up of the pottery scene from Ghost for praise.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· GA
80*

The review presents the sequel as deliriously silly and entertaining. It praises its marvellously tasteless juvenilia and chaotic comic spirit.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
28 June 1991
64*

The page identifies this as a film review, but its text is inaccessible. The critic’s verdict and specific praise or complaint cannot be verified.

Read the full review →
Empire
28 January 1991 · Kim Newman
55*

Newman finds the sequel still capable of delivering laughs, but says the formula is wearing thin. He praises Leslie Nielsen’s performance while faulting Priscilla Presley’s casting and the jokes’ reduced cleverness and surprise.

Read the full review →
Variety
31 December 1990 · Variety Staff
35*

The review finds the sequel less funny than its predecessor, though still capable of producing choice comic moments. It singles out the send-up of Ghost as an amusing scene.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear worth watching?
The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear is worth watching for Leslie Nielsen’s straight-faced foolishness, and we score it 72 out of 100. His solemn delivery keeps weak material funny often enough to justify 85 minutes, though repeated pratfalls and second-hand jokes make this a better choice for slapstick enthusiasts than anyone seeking surprises.
How long is The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear, and what is it rated?
The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear runs 1h 25m. It is a comedy and crime film.
Where can I watch The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear in the Philippines?
The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear is not on any streaming or rental service in the Philippines at the moment. It is available in 41 other countries; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily.
How violent or frightening is The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear, and is it suitable for children?
The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear carries a UK 15 certificate and is not suitable for children, despite its broad comic style. Sexual jokes, vulgarity and repeated pratfalls make it a better fit for older teenagers and adults comfortable with that material; we would not assume that its silliness guarantees gentle content.
How does The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear compare to OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies?
The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear offers broader, more repetitive slapstick than OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies, which we favour for its precise recreation of a Fifties spy thriller. Both depend on a fool’s unearned confidence, but Nielsen’s solemn delivery is the main reason to choose the former; the latter offers more carefully realised surroundings, though its gags also thin out.

Cast

If you liked this, try…

  1. A Shot in the Dark (1964) · not reviewed yetAnother policeman whose confidence survives every piece of evidence against it.

  2. The Wrong Box (1966) · not reviewed yetProper manners persist through a British farce of greed and misplaced corpses.

  3. The Man with Two Brains (1983) · not reviewed yetMedical respectability proves no obstacle to a steady supply of indecent nonsense.

  4. Kung Fu Hustle (2004) · not reviewed yetMartial arts expertise makes the physical absurdity funnier, rather than merely louder.

  5. OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies (2006, Fi1m 76)A secret agent’s unearned assurance makes every misunderstanding that much worse.

Free account

Know what to watch tonight

Two lists that know where things are streaming, collections you can share, your own score beside ours, and Discover that remembers what you have seen.

  • Want to see, sorted by what is streaming now
  • Seen, with your score out of ten
  • No adverts, ever