hello why no topic

It's an okay film, but frankly I picked up a pre-viewed DVD of it only because of Christopher Lee's participation in it. I wasn't disappointed; Lee gives a fine account of himself in what is basically a one-note role.

Even more interesting, for fans of Mr. Lee, is one of the disc's extras, a ten minute interview with Lee conducted entirely in Spanish, for that nation's consumption. He is not entirely fluent with the language but speaks it well, occasionally needing a few promptings from his Spanish speaking interviewer. He even gets to display his rich baritone when asked to sing a little opera!

I thought this film was a fun and enjoyable sequel to the excellent original.

"We're all part Shatner/And part James Dean/Part Warren Oates/And Steven McQueen"

I love the first film, and while this sequel is inferior, it is enjoyable thanks to mainly the fine performances of Christopher Lee and Bette Davis.




"Life after death is as improbable as sex after marriage"- Madeleine Kahn(CLUE, 1985)

Both Movies are very good-but if the sequel isn't as good as the first one, it could be because the two leads (Ike Isenmann & Kim Richards)are not together for 2 thirds of the film. They are seperated most of the time-and because of that-thier chemistry was not as evident as it was in the first film.

The strengh of the first film is that the two leads were like two peas in a pod! They were together most of the time-and they had-in my view the best chemistry I had seen from two child stars at the time.

Another thing about Kim and Ike-is that the film makers didn't play off the cuteness of the two leads-Both Kim and Ike were cute-but it wasn't overdone or emphsised.

That being said, This film has two solid supporting players-Bette Davis and Christopher Lee-which adds to the film's strengh.

I happen to dislike Archie Bunker with great passion and conviction

Jay