Despite its ability to conjure a laugh here and there, Bad Neighbours 2 fails in its attempt to be a raunchy platform for eye rolling left-wing statements.

It is hard to think of a more ideologically driven filmmaker in Hollywood today than Seth Rogen. Whether star, writer, or producer (or in the case of Bad Neighbours 2 all three), his philosophies on life and how to live it (drugs good, religion bad, and other lefty tripe to go along with it) infests almost every project he’s been involved in.

In many ways this had to be admired. Yet admiration can only last so long, and Bad Neighbours 2 proves that point.

The sequel to highly successful Bad Neighbours, Rogen returns as simple bong smoking family man Mac Radner, who along with his equally lewd wife Kelly (an always game Rose Byrne) have to contend with another group of rambunctious college students partying it up next door, this time in the form of a sorority led by Shelby (Chloe Grace Moretz).

What is essentially that same plot as the first movie adds two elements: the first the return of aesthetical striking yet immature “bro” Teddy (Zac Efron) who plays wild card in this second round of student’s vs young family; and the second a commentary on sexism in the college party stakes.

The latter brings an interesting twist to proceedings, yet that interest quickly wanes as the obnoxious nature of the sorority’s pranks intensify, not to mention the hypocrisy of a commentary on sexism while proudly displaying Efron in chest exposing glory at the drop of a dime. Elsewhere a major supporting character from the first movie is rewritten as a gay man, no doubt to complete its progressive drugs/sexism/gay marriage trifecta. Cue yawns from the crowd.

It’s one thing to create an R-rated soap box which to preach from, yet doing so in such a strong armed and contrived way wins neither applause nor credibility.

Of course there are some laughs to be found in Bad Neighbours 2. Too many comedic talents feature for that not to happen. Scenes of physical comedy are especially effective, such as a daring breakout from a locked garage that features Rogen and Efron at their personable best.

Yet too often these moments are undercut by moments of crassness that fail to arise any sympathy for its characters. This is especially true of the “done upon” Radner’s whose parenting of their toddler daughter is a consistent joke that gets no laughs. At one point it is explained she was found eating “marijuana nuggets”. Throughout the film she treats her mother’s vibrator as if it were a teddy bear. Placed throughout the house is a collection of bongs as if Rogen was playing the small girl from Signs.

It all leaves an unpleasant aftertaste, as most Seth Rogen movies do. What would have been a great I plot twist s if the Radner’s were looked up for abusive parenting. Now what is a cause worth standing behind!