Dumbest part?
When that drug lord revealed his love of American romance novels.
shareDid you feel it was not believable?
shareI’d say that she pretty obviously did.
Just a wild guess.
Many dictators, drug lords and such have strange likes and past times that far exceed the love of American Romance novels.
Dumb and unbelievable are two different things.
That’s just a wild guess.
😂
I thought it was both.
That scene with the Grateful Dead pilot was also kind of dumb. It's like they couldn't decide if they were making an adventure film, or a zany comedy. I still enjoyed the movie. The sequel, however, is probably the worst movie ever made.
"That scene with the Grateful Dead pilot was also kind of dumb. "
Your first point is .. well, on point.
However, this one would need an explanation - what's so 'dumb' about a drug-smuggling pilot crashing in the jungle?
That no one would've found the plane (with so much money at stake, people would definitely have been searching for it)?
That those two goofballs found it SO easily (so anyone should've been able to find it back when it crashed, so there wouldn't have been any drugs in there)?
That animals wouldn't have gotten into the plane and ravaged all its 'treasures'?
And so on..
I don't see what's particularly 'dumb' about that scene.
The 'THE Joan Wilder?!'-scene is ridiculous, because it's not only idiotic and EXTREMELY unlikely, but also unrealistic and worst of all, AWFULLY cartoony. So any criticism towards it is warranted, and the scene is so obviously over-the-top goofy unrealism, you could never escape that situation that way in real life - it's easy to understand and obvious why someone might not like that scene.
But the crashed plane scene is NOT obviously cartoony or weird. In fact, it's downright subtle. What's 'dumb' about it escapes me, and is definitely not obvious at all. So this one requires an explanation, if you want anyone to agree with you. Compared to so many things in the movie, I don't think THAT scene deserves almost any criticism besides the nagging stuff (which, sadly, is realistic).
"Many dictators, drug lords and such have strange likes and past times"
Um.. PAST times? Really? Honestly? This is the best you can do?
Do they really carry around past TIMES in their pockets somehow? Do these dictators have access to some kind of time-traveling pockets or how the heck do they just have 'PAST TIMES', maybe as collections on their 'time-wall'?
Please, please learn to write correct english so I don't have to push your head in the embarrassing turd you somehow scraped together and make you sniff it until you realize how it stinks and maybe you'll learn to think a couple of times what you are actually typing before so carelessly clicking the 'add reply'-button.
It's "pastime", not 'past time', for crying out loud!
People should also learn 'a lot', 'every day' vs. 'everyday' and such, but one thing at a time.
Also, dictators having weird tastes does _NOT_ translate to their personality doing a 180-degree turn just because the author of some book is there, and them becoming EXTREMELY CHILDISH with bubbly excitement.
Even if an evil dictator with blood and drugs on their hands WERE in a situation where they suddenly meet an author they respect, they would still treat them with suspicion and evil demeanor, even if they were to extend a 'friendly posture' towards them. Remember, these are people of power - no matter how weird, they are STILL not a DAMN CARTOON CHARACTER, which, I think, was the whole point of the original post.
The whole sequence is just so stupidly cartoony.
What bothers me more, though, is 'Lupe's Escape', which is like 10 cm deep, 2 meter wide 'river' that anyone could EASILY cross, with or without a car. If you are going to create a moronic thing like that, at least make the river look wild and un-crossable without a bridge or a skilled canoeist (?).