Father of the Bride Part II review: A sequel that still works

🎬 Father of the Bride Part II is the sequel to the film we reviewed earlier: read our Father of the Bride (1991) review first.

Father of the Bride Part II is a film that works even today, and it works especially well if you are the father of a daughter. It is not quite as good as the first one, and I will say why, but it gave us a lovely family evening and I would happily put it on again.

The story in one line

Annie is married and settled, and she tells her parents that she is expecting a baby. George Banks, who has barely recovered from the wedding, is faced with something new: becoming a grandfather. He does not take it entirely calmly, and a midlife crisis of his own soon arrives.

The film is a remake of a 1951 sequel, and it keeps the same warm, gently chaotic tone as the first film. It is built on the idea that big moments in a family come in waves, and that a father who has just learned to let his daughter go has to do it all over again in a new way.

The dad of a daughter perspective

This is the part that matters most to me. As a father of a daughter, you see yourself in George much more easily than you expect, and it hits harder when your daughter is already a teenager. The film is about a father who is not ready for his child to grow up, who feels the years going faster than he would like, and who covers it with jokes. It is hard to watch that without thinking of your own situation.

You do not need to be at the exact stage of the story for it to land. A father with a daughter in her teens is already looking ahead to the day she leaves, and the film touches that nerve gently rather than heavily. It does it with humour, which is why it works: you laugh at George because you recognise him.

That is why I would single out this film for dads. The jokes are for everyone, but the feeling is for those of us with daughters.

Steve Martin and the whole cast

Steve Martin is again at the centre, and he is as good as he was in the first film: stressed, funny and unexpectedly moving. Diane Keaton is warm as Nina, and Kimberly Williams and George Newbern bring the young couple to life. Martin Short returns as the wedding planner Franck, and he remains a highlight whenever he is on screen.

The family still feels like a real family, and that is the film’s biggest strength. The comedy comes from people rather than from gags, so it has aged better than many comedies of the 1990s.

Does it still work today?

Yes. The film is from 1995 and it looks it, but the situations, a baby on the way, a father not ready for change, a family adjusting, are as familiar today as they were then. It does not rely on references to its time, and that is why it holds up.

Why not as good as the first?

The first film had a simple, perfect premise: a father losing his daughter to a wedding. The sequel has more going on, and it is a little looser as a result. It is funny and warm, but it does not quite reach the focus or the emotional punch of the original. That is the gap between a 4 and a 3.5.

It is still a film worth watching, and if you enjoyed the first, you will enjoy this one.

The cast and the crew

Four years after the first film, the Banks family is back. Steve Martin plays George Banks and Diane Keaton plays his wife, Nina. Kimberly Williams plays their daughter Annie, now married to Bryan (George Newbern), and Kieran Culkin plays their son Matty. Martin Short returns as the wedding planner Franck Eggelhoffer, Eugene Levy plays Mr. Habib, and BD Wong and Jane Adams appear in supporting roles.

Charles Shyer directed from a script by Nancy Meyers and Shyer, and Meyers produced. William A. Fraker was the cinematographer, and Alan Silvestri came back to write the score. It was made by Touchstone Pictures, Sandollar Productions and The Meyers/Shyer Company and distributed by Buena Vista Pictures. The budget was under $40 million.

How the story works

The premise is simple and fits the first film’s theme. Annie announces that she is pregnant, and George, who found it hard enough to let go of his daughter at her wedding, now has to cope with becoming a grandfather. The comedy comes from George’s reaction as the family prepares for a baby.

The film is also a remake. It follows the pattern of Father’s Little Dividend (1951), which was the sequel to the original Father of the Bride (1950), so the plot of a wedding followed by a baby has been a franchise tradition for decades. Counting both generations, this is the fourth film in the series.

Release and box office

The film opened on 8 December 1995 on 1,949 screens in the United States and came second at the box office with $11.1 million. It earned $76.6 million in the United States and Canada and about $103 million worldwide, which is a solid result for a family comedy of its time. The runtime is 106 minutes.

How it was received

Reviews were mixed, but audiences liked it. Rotten Tomatoes shows 52% positive from 25 reviews with an average rating of 5.7, and Metacritic gives it a score of 49 from 16 critics. Audiences gave it an A-minus on CinemaScore. Roger Ebert’s verdict is the one that best fits the film: he wrote that it is not a great movie, but that it is warm and fuzzy and has a lot of sweetness.

That is a fair description of what this sequel does. It does not try to be cleverer than the original; it tries to give you the same family again, and for people who liked the Banks family the first time, that is enough. If you have not seen the first film, start with our Father of the Bride (1991) review, because the sequel assumes you know these people.

Is it a good family movie night?

Yes. It is rated PG, the humour is gentle and the story is warm. It works best for teenagers and parents, and it is a good film to put on for a quiet family evening.

• Best age: teenagers and parents.
• Runtime: about 106 minutes.
• Double feature: watch it after the 1991 original for the full story.

Both films are available together in one release, and Prime Video’s 30-day free trial is an easy way to try a big catalogue at home. Catalogues change, so check availability before you sign up.

Is Father of the Bride Part II worth watching?

Yes. It is not quite as good as the first film, but it is warm, funny and still works today. We rate it 3.5 out of 5.

Do I need to see the first film before Part II?

It helps. The sequel builds on the family and characters of the 1991 film, so you will get more out of it if you know them.

Is Father of the Bride Part II suitable for kids?

It is rated PG and is a gentle family comedy. It works best for teenagers and parents, since much of the emotion is about family transitions.

Who directed Father of the Bride Part II?

Charles Shyer, who also directed the 1991 original.

When was Father of the Bride Part II released?

It was released on 8 December 1995.

Is Father of the Bride Part II a remake?

In part. It is a sequel to the 1991 film, and its story of a daughter’s pregnancy follows Father’s Little Dividend (1951), which was the sequel to the original Father of the Bride (1950). Counting those, it is the fourth film in the series.

How did Father of the Bride Part II do at the box office?

It opened on 8 December 1995 in second place with 11.1 million dollars and went on to earn 76.6 million in the United States and Canada and about 103 million worldwide. The budget was under 40 million dollars.

What did critics think of Father of the Bride Part II?

Reviews were mixed: Rotten Tomatoes shows 52% positive from 25 reviews, and Metacritic gives it a score of 49. Audiences were kinder and gave it an A-minus on CinemaScore. Roger Ebert called it warm and fuzzy, with a lot of sweetness.