I lasted just under 28 minute's then I turned it off, what a pile of rubbish, made just to milk more cash out of the public
share[deleted]
JD Salinger did write more books. Ever heard of Franny and Zooey?
--
It's not "Sci-Fi", it's SF!
"Calvinism is a very liberal religious ethos." - Truekiwijoker
[deleted]
Until after the end credits. The only pile of rubbish is your attitude.
shareThe begining was a bit rough, but it got better as it went along. I don't really know what people were expecting, but I thought it delivered for the most part. There were little things that just cracked me up and brought back memories of the first. I liked rob riggle in this, he helped.
shareAnyone with half a brain could tell immediately by the trailer it was going to be nowhere even close to the genius of the first one so that in and of itself should have let you know. But back to your question…I made it to around the time Rob Ribble's character showed up and then it just became beyond unbearable.
shareI made it through although I have to admit I constantly checked my watch in the last third of the movie.
shareFor me it was 10...it was so miserably bad, I just couldn't torture myself any longer.
shareMade it through the scene after the end credits. I didn't think the movie was bad at all. I don't understand how someone who liked the original at least didn't make it to the end credits.
Votes: 3,290
My website: (http://geeksteronmovies.blogspot.com/)
Because it was disrespectful of the original. I managed 20 minutes too.
EZ the man with two legs
by ezzy_ezzy » 15 hours ago (Sat Aug 22 2015 02:41:12)What exactly was "disrespectful" about it? It had no recasts and plenty of references to its predecessor. Based on the majority of sequels, this was quite respect by comparison.
IMDb member since May 2002
Because it was disrespectful of the original. I managed 20 minutes too.
It just should not of been green lighted without a confirmed humourous script. Instead they was riding on the name and success of the original and hence why it is instantly forgettable and will not be regarded as a good sequel. You cannot make a legendary comedy, wait twenty years churn out a terrible script and expect people to swallow it. Hence its ratings and box office returns being so poor. So now when you watch the first one, you will automatically think how poor the sequel was. That is the disrespect I talk of. I will never know what the movie turned out like, as 20 minutes was enough for me.
EZ the man with two legs
You cannot make a legendary comedy, wait twenty years churn out a terrible script and expect people to swallow it.Duh. Yet you and I both spent time and money on this "hopeless" film.
it was better than the first. Some people just lack humor. And it was a blockbuster, made 86 million with a 35m budget. Sh you can stop fabricating about a poor box office.
shareI watched the whole thing. Even the trailer for the 2034 movie.
share[deleted]