MovieChat Forums > Waxwork II: Lost in Time (1992) Discussion > What happened to Hickox after the first?

What happened to Hickox after the first?

posted 18 years ago by earthcaughtfire
8 replies | jump to latest

This movie doesn't hold a candle to the first one. What happened to Hickox after the original? This movie was so dumb I almost turned it off. Yeah I know the first one's premise isn't exactly high art and/or realistic in the first place, but still...this one feels like it was slapped together in a couple days. Anyone else completely disappointed by this flick? If I didn't see Hickox's name in the credits I would've assumed Claudio Fragasso and Bruno Mattei made it.

[–] Vampenguin 18 years ago

He sure didnt inherit much from Daddy...

----------------------------------
Death is but a door, time is but a window...I will be back.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Jerv23325-1 16 years ago

The second film tried to be too many things at once, but really, it wasn't even a remotely bad film. There were flashes of genius in this film, it just was too much at once.

Catch DOLLHOUSE on Fridays at 9/8c on FOX

[–] libra113 13 years ago

Yeah, I just finished watching it again after years and I have to say it's okay but I think I would trimmed the fantasy segment as it seemed like the dragged the whole pace of the movie just a tad and could have been much shorter and to the point.

http://dawnofthedeadfanfiction.bravehost.com/index.html

[–] norman-dostal 9 years ago

there were no flashes of genius in this-it was simply horrid, no flow, bad acting...unwatchable-so mad because I LOVE the first movie

[–] alesisqs61 8 years ago

There was more style in the 2nd but less cohesion.

Just one example was the back story of him being rich is gone.

They all seemed to come from a nice rich area but then when Sarah gets home

we see she's living in a dump. Parts like that...little things don't add up for me. Part 2 was way more campy and less serious but yet it had far more style to it, which is odd.

http://www.youtube.com/user/UCpCwer0R-QR3GcAH3vvYuow
https://soundcloud.com/#carjet-penhorn

[–] MadRotaryOne_DDCgod 8 years ago

Uh. What are you talking about, the apartment building where Sarah gets dropped off
is identical. You just ASSUMED that she had money. But she was in the same crappy
apartment building. I'm sure the inside of her apart wasn't actually in the building
that the filmed the outside of, but you can't assume that it must be a nice place
just because it has some fancy awning in front of it.

As far as the lead, showing him living in a fancy place in the first part is irrelevant,
for all we know his rich parents disowned him due to him acting insane.
Not sure how any of that matters. Even in the first one they only
show his house a couple of times.