in this film is absolutely spectacular. I shuddered every time she spoke, she pulls off Tramell's sociopathic and extremely manipulative character perfectly. I felt that every word she said was meant to fork with Dr. Glass's mind.
I thought she did good in the sense the character is still fascinating, cold and sexy. However, with the first movie she delivered a class A performance and created a character that ended up believable. With the 2d movie the character became over the top and B-ish. Maybe it's because the entire movie lacked the A-quality.
I think the director got a little impressed and since Sharon Stone was carrying the project, he let her do her stuff without pushing her. Verhoeven is known to work intensively with his actresses and since Sharon was a nobody back then, he really put her on the edge and got the best of her.
Bottom line, she was her average good but I felt she lacked the direction she needed to be at her best.
I think this movie is obviously not so good as the first one, which is a modern classic, but Sharon Stone`s catherine Trammel is still a hell of a character. Just Sharon could play this woman so well, she elevated her in a category of fictional characters that are almost legends like Anthony Hopkins` Hannibal lecter. She`s a gourgeous woman, and a talented actress , and movies like Casino, The Mighty, Last Dance and Bobby have shown her range and credibility.
I didn't like Sharon Stone in this because unlike in the original, there were NEVER any scenes where Catherine appeared to be just 'normal' and even with a bit of a sense of humor.
This one though, all she had to do was act in a low, sexy voice full of sexual innuendos in scene after scene. Gone was the Catherine Trammell who was so naturally appealing in the original, to be replaced by this one-note robotic performance.
Says Ebert in his review of BI 2: "The Catherine Tramell role cannot be played well, but Sharon Stone can play it badly better than any other actress alive". I think I sort of get what he means.