Was this sequel anygood? - Wild Geese II (1985) Discussion

[–] john-wheat 16 years ago

Yes this film is worth watching. I would recommend it to all of those who liked the first Wild Geese. However don't expect it to be anything like the first one because it isn't.

reply

[–] frog2077 16 years ago

The first movie was ott ridiculous but very enjoyable if you like that sort of thing. This sequel is just as ridiculous but tries to take itself a bit more seriously which is possibly where it falls down. Still I re-watched it on TV the other day and liked it.

The real downer for me is Edward Fox, he really doesn’t fit the role all that well. I like the fact that on the VHS box and poster they couldn’t even be bothered to change Richard Burtons drawn face, sort of sums the film up really an ‘action/adventure Burton vehicle’ that never was.

reply

[–] verbusen 13 years ago

Yeah there were several "oh crap" moments for me watching this. It's got nothing in common with the first one it's actually a lot more like Dogs Of War in it's style. Highly recommended.

reply

[–] Prismark10 11 years ago

There is a touch of Dogs of War about the film. It a so so film.

Its that man again!!

reply

[–] thelastfaceyouwillsee 10 years ago

Watch it through four fingers! It is a bad 80s actioner that really has no reason to call itself WG2. The unnecessary replay of key moments from the first film at the start of this movie only serves to remind the viewer that WG2 is a very different and poorer movie. Wild Geese was good gung ho fun but Geese 2 is served with more cheese than is good for you. It would have been slightly better if they had dropped the title and all connections and nods to the original. Edward Fox who is usually pretty good was miscast here and seems to be sleepwalking his part. Lee Marvin might have been a better choice. He was still alive in '85.

"Remember, you have to make it home to get paid" (The Dogs of War)

reply