"How do we top the previous movie?"
"We need more explosions and bullets, and a less compelling narrative."
.
"How do we top the previous movie?"
"We need more explosions and bullets, and a less compelling narrative."
I think it was not very good as well. I mean, when you start seeing all those slow mo scenes alternating by with high speed movement, like during the forest chase, it just becomes annoying and dumb.
It is a cheap movie tactic these days when they use so much slow motion. It is not just cliche but it is also done to cater to people who watch 3D
I enjoyed the movie a lot, but I agree the slow mo scenes started to grate on me, heh.
"We never win any ball games...but we sure have some interesting discussions."
To be fair, many a sequel follow such a "rule."
One problem would be killing off an attractive movie early on. Not good.
I didn't see the first one, but unless they really changed things, the problem here seemed to be that the idea behind these characters already was somewhat precious and it didn't take much to go over board.
I agree btw this movie was lousy. But, not sure about 'worse sequel ever.' Two sequels that were rather bad would be "Beverly Hills Cop II" and "Smokey and the Bandit II." Both were rather bad, the second for some reason thinking having the title character and apparent hero act like a total jerk in a comedy was a good idea.
Probably the worst thread ever.
---
Lincoln Lee: I lost a partner.
Peter Bishop: I lost a universe!
Agreed. I'm baffled by the generally positive response (by fans and box office numbers) this movie received. I really liked the first one, but I have never been more let down by a sequel than I was with this. It's a truly terrible, bordering on unwatchable, mess of a film.
shareFirst one is great but second has special meaning they me as I took my wife on our first date to see game of shadows
share