“Megan 2.0” (2025) starts two years after “Megan” (2022) when Gemma (Allison Williams) built the titular homicidal, self-aware, killer AI doll to befriend and protect Cady (Violet McGraw). After believing that she killed her creation, Gemma has not gone full luddite since she, and her former coworkers, Cole (Brian Jordan Alvarez) and Tess (Jen Van Epps), become entrepreneurs developing an exoskeleton tech business to compete with robots. Gemma has become a well-known spokesperson warning about the dangers of technology and children but must reverse herself on her newfound beliefs when she discovers that a military grade robot, AMELIA (Ivanna Sakhno), which stands for autonomous military engagement logistics and infiltration android, is destroying anyone who contributed to her technology, which includes Gemma and Cady. Fortunately, at the same time, Megan (Amie Donald acts as her body and Jenna Davis as her voice) reveals that she has stayed on mission and is willing to protect them, but this time without trying to kill them. Will Megan and Gemma be able to turn over a new leaf?
Disclaimer: I saw “Megan 2.0” with less than three hours of sleep. I got the screener for “Ironheart” (2025) a little over twenty-four hours before it would expire, but I work during the weekdays and had this screening. I was awake for the whole film but turned into Data: understanding that everyone was having a good time and able to dispassionately appreciate the movie’s high points (think typing “LOL” with a stone face) but rarely feeling anything. Was it the movie’s fault or mine? Shrug. I’m only human.
I adored the first movie and thought that it cut too much out. “Megan 2.0” took the opposite tact and packed everything that they wanted into the story, which meant a plethora of delightful performances, clever quips and action spectacle to choose from with a heavy dose of brilliant satire, but there is such a thing as too much of a good thing. It ended up detracting from the core trio, Gemma, Cady and Megan, so others could share the spotlight. The first film underexplored the fact that before Megan had a functional body, Megan felt a connection to Gemma, a cross between being her child and partner, which while not romantic, Megan perceived as equal because Gemma treated her as a confidant and shared the guardian duties over Cady. Gemma has always had control issues. Cady has always been a bit of a psycho. Megan has always been figuring things out, but now she is supposed to be self-actualized. In this one, the relationship is no longer central to the story, and it is rare for all three characters to be in the same place at the same time. It was disappointing for the themes to exist without further exploration and development.
“Megan 2.0” is like Megan: fabulous, but all over the place. In the first film, she was unstoppable, but in this one, a bumbling FBI agent (Timm Sharp) can get the drop on her. To be fair, when ruthless calculation is off the table, she has fewer options, and she gets torn up and transformed into a raggedy doll long before she must fight AMELIA, who could be mistaken for an Olsen sister or Scarlett Johanson. Not to be outdone, Megan has a moment nailing her Black Widow impression, which is often featured in the trailers. Any flaws with the character’s depiction lie at the feet of returning director Gerald Johnstone flexing his feature writing muscle for the second time after “Housebound” (2014).
Visually the robots are more fascinating to watch: perfect, animalistic, demonic movements with steam punk gear audio. Because Cady is older, so is Megan, which means that her face still looks like the baby-faced doll that she was, but her body is more developed whereas AMELIA is a grown woman with visual references to “Metropolis” (1927) and “Ex Machina” (2014). It is obvious that while the narrative’s whole concept is a cross between an international spy thriller and a Terminator-esque Judgment Day, it also feels like a cheeky reprise to the “Austin Powers” killer sex bots while clinging to its rating. It offers an excuse to enjoy the stylings of Jemaine Clement who plays a philanthrocapitalist, Alton, who acts like Professor Charles Xavier if he became a tech bro and owns his twenty-five-year-old company, Altwave, which has a monopoly on global cloud servers. If he was on screen any longer, he would just walk away with the whole movie.
“Megan 2.0” is strong at poking fun at the ridiculous men in technology who consider themselves thought leaders but are less enlightened than they think. Alton is an objectifying, financially successful descendent of Austin Powers minus a self-preservation gene. The best burns are reserved for Christian Bradley (Aristotle Athari), a techno-ethicist who heads the Center for Safe Technology, who has the same reserved tone as Malcolm Gladwell, and as his role expands, it becomes the most surprising, funny bit that really nails the contradictions of being an ethicist while also having a huge ego that creates an enormous blind spot towards how he treats others’ autonomy to service his fame whore desires. When he tells his employees to keep it down while on Zoom with the UN as they are fighting for their lives, it is so delicious and surreal.
Surrounded by obnoxious people and killer robots, Williams mostly plays the astonished straight guy but also gets to let loose with a better fight scene than anything in “A Working Man” (2025). Gemma is just as ridiculous, but is self-aware enough to know it, especially since Cady keeps her grounded. Cady also gets to be a baby bad ass. It was a puzzling choice to sideline their characters so Cole’s role could expand. Is there a huge fan base demanding more screentime for him?
The actual logistics of the story are more complex than expected with multiple twists and turns. Upon reflection and intense scrutiny, it stands up under pressure and is cohesive and well thought out. It just happens so quickly that it seems to stumble. The problem is that Johnstone packed too much in the third act, which I largely predicted where it would land, but it even lost me on multiple occasions. It was also disconcerting to watch it immediately after “Ironheart” because they used similar gimmicks such as the disembodied hand roaming around and carrying out the mission and the inherent conflict between the creator and her AI creation regarding her existence as an autonomous human being. It gave me a bad case of déjà vu.
“Megan 2.0” shares unfortunate common ground with “Another Simple Favor” (2025) by making peace between the titular character and her Dr. Frankenstein. I would not mind watching this sequel again when I am in better condition, but it is a little disappointing to see unrepentant, venal, selfish, murderous women characters into tamer versions who make peace with their sworn enemies. If crowds can adore women at their worst, then why scale them back when there is no demand for it. Stop neutering the danger of iconic villains.
