LAYDEEZ - Rick's the name, and cornball hamming up is the game, but lust after me no more, for my heart is promised to another - Evie by name, lustbucket by nature.
Lo, these two years or so ago, I did for Imhotep, that good for nothing half eaten fiend from beneath the sand despite the pathetic attempts at assistance from my Yankee colleagues (God, I detest my birthright at times, esp now I have met my ickle lovey poos) and Evie's dimwitted bro Jonathan.
We rode into the sunset after that one and were all set to live happily ever after when the BUGGER was back, waiting to wreak a pretty dastardly revenge - of course, we foiled him, you don't need any crystal ball or one of Evie's journals to tell you that much now do you, although I'd advise you to see this little feast for the eyes as I look pretty damn dashing in it.
Yours
Rick O'Connell Esq (age 13 and three quarters)
Well, old Richard might be urging you to give this one a chance but I can't say that I can recommend it as a good way of passing a couple of hours, I'm afraid. To stand any chance whatsoever of getting any enjoyment out of this sequel, you'd have to regress speedily to childhood and watch it with an almighty bag of ye olde popcorn.
You get pretty much the same ingredients as the first film, same cast, although you also get Rick and Evie's son now, plus The Rock (cue squinty eyebrow, he's so cool!) as The Scorpion King, same FX, largely same storyline (well, near enough) and precious little new.
But that's not what it's about after all, it's just rip roaring (what on earth does that phrase actually mean?) mindless drivel, vacuous candyfloss for the eyes. IT AIN'T MEANT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY...
Still, you can't let a naff film off the hook entirely because it parodies itself... let's be perfectly honest, this film is absolutely dire - bad acting, bad story, bad jokes, boring FX, naff guests and a precocious kid to boot (if only someone would boot him). One film in the series I could take, at a push, but now they're milking it dry and we should stay away in droves, but there's little chance of that with the amount of hype this movie is getting. I mean look how many reads any opinion about it on an opinion site gets, whether the writing is good, bad and indifferent. You know it's going to be a big box office smash and that Mummy 3 - Bandages In London will soon be gnawing away at our brains.
Come on, now, DO NOT CHECK THIS OUT - IT IS DIRE....
ALTERNATIVELY...
Have a high old time with disbelief suspended and cherish a damn good adventure movie which is fanciful but great fun.
PS I'd go with my original view because there's a lot better films in this genre around...
How helpful would this review be to a person making a buying decision? Rating guidelines
Production Year: 2000 - Horror - Director: Keenen Ivory Wayans - Original Language: English - Classification: 18 years and over - Starring: Carmen Electra, Anna Faris, Kurt Fuller, James Van Der Beek, Keenen Ivory Wayans
Good op, I also think this movie was a waste of space.
redridinghood 31.05.2001 01:01
...although I have to disagree that the 2 films have the same FX's. This sequal is far more advanced in that department than the first and has a totally different feel to it becuase of it. It was good brainless fun wasn't it?!
Advantages: brilliant acting, great special effects, tonnes of special features, cheap Disadvantages: feels as if special effects are prioty over acting, storyline wasn't as good
May 31st, 2001
(Feb 17th, 2002)
very helpful by (79%):
helpful by (17%):
somewhat helpful by (4%):
