LoginHave a good deal of fondness for the original television series, if marginally as a child than an adult. Didn't care for the first feature film from 2011 but didn't find anywhere near as bad as it was made out to be, it had a lot of faults but was semi-watchable.
It's pretty much the same with 'The Smurfs 2', very problematic but semi-watchable. It is hard to say which is better between the two, to me some aspects are done better in one, some are about the same and some are done worse. And contrary to those going blue in the face, defending the film (not bashing at all their right to like it, have no problem with it) and bashing the critics and those who dislike 'The Smurfs 2', it's a family film not a kids film (just because it has animation and has content oriented at younger audiences doesn't mean it's for kids) and there is no law against seeing a sequel to a film one dislikes, it may because of having family members who liked the first and wanted to see the sequel as part of family cinema trips, one may be a Smurf completest and one may be fans of an actor in the film. Why do people have such a problem with opinions and overuse and abuse "freedom of speech" these days?
Anyway, starting with what was good about 'The Smurfs 2', it's a bright and colourful film to look at and while not outstanding the animation and 3D effects are above average. Once again Hank Azaria and Jonathan Winters are perfect as Gargamel and Papa, Azaria looks as if he's having a whizz of a time (not a subtle performance by all means but in all honesty there is nothing subtle about Gargamel as a character) and Winters is the liveliest Smurf characterisation.
Katy Perry is more consistent and heartfelt, what was done with Smurfette gave more heart than there was in the first film. Christina Ricci echoes fond memories of her show-stealing Wednesday Addams in 'The Addams Family' and 'Addams Family Values'. A few amusing moments here and there and the voice work generally is fine.
On the other hand, the story is basic, daft and predictable, with over-obvious plotting and slapstick and one-liners that are more tired and lacking in maturity than witty or clever. The soundtrack is uninspired at best. Darker elements are included here and they don't really gel and makes the tone feel unfocused.
Characters are not particularly well developed, the closest character to being developed and done successfully is Smurfette. The editing could have tighter and more fluid, while Neil Patrick Harris doesn't look as engaged in his more banally written than before role. Brendan Gleeson does his best in an atypical at this point role but doesn't look particularly comfortable.
In conclusion, not particularly good but semi-watchable. 4/10 Bethany Cox
The Smurfs 2 Reviews
Return of the Smurfs
Posted : 1 year, 11 months ago on 4 June 2022 07:22
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A bad movie
Posted : 9 years, 5 months ago on 7 December 2014 11:07
To be honest, I really didn’t like the first installment but my youngest daughter really enjoyed it, so I bought this on dvd (thank God, it was pretty cheap) for her as a gift for St Nicolas (some Dutch version of Santa Claus) and I ended up watching it with her. Eventually, it wasn't really worse than the first installment but since it was a sequel, I still gave it a lower rating. The main issue I had with this flick, is that they took the same misguided formula and did exactly the same thing with it with an even more underwhelming result. At least, the first time around, I was quite generous and I gave them some few extra points for at least trying and those little blue guys did look pretty good. But, for this sequel, even the novelty was not there anymore and the whole thing became this giant snooze party and a massive cash-grab for Sony hoping that the parents won't check the other available family features when they go out with their kids. Even though the Smurfs were not my favorite cartoon when I was a kid, there was still something charming about them but it is now long gone with this franchise.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Better than the first yet not the best movie
Posted : 10 years, 5 months ago on 1 December 2013 07:15
Frankly to say the movie was not that bad. The thing is it is not for everyone. It is a simple storied movie that suits for children, they will enjoy it more than you and I do. Maybe here and there an adult can enjoy especially one with the kids. Other than that it is an easily ignorable movie just like the 'Alvin and Chipmunks' sequels.
The story follows after Smurfette was kidnapped by the evil wizard Gargamel. Along with papa Smurf, few others join him in the journey to find and rescue her. So the adventure resets into the Paris where these little blue creatures roams around the streets finding the abducted one with the help of their old friend Patrick. Do they track them down and what happen and how they gonna defeat the powerful villain is the remain portion of the tale before it concludes.
The Tale's notion was about the family's importance especially it tells how a father and his child relationship should be. It was thoughtful and meaningful but the movie failed to hold strongly on that line. I think this movie is once watchable and also easily skippable in another angle.
The story follows after Smurfette was kidnapped by the evil wizard Gargamel. Along with papa Smurf, few others join him in the journey to find and rescue her. So the adventure resets into the Paris where these little blue creatures roams around the streets finding the abducted one with the help of their old friend Patrick. Do they track them down and what happen and how they gonna defeat the powerful villain is the remain portion of the tale before it concludes.
The Tale's notion was about the family's importance especially it tells how a father and his child relationship should be. It was thoughtful and meaningful but the movie failed to hold strongly on that line. I think this movie is once watchable and also easily skippable in another angle.
0 comments, Reply to this entry