Which is worse: this or THoND 2?


Well I recently watched "The Hunchback of Notre Dame 2" again recently and the movie was a lot worse than I remember it. "Cinderella 2" has better quality animation than THOND 2 at least, but I'm indecisive as to which sequel is worse. Perhaps even "Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas" is worse than both, I honestly dont know.

They all had bad writing and character development but all have their few interesting tidbits.

Which one do you think is worse?

Is there any slight tidbits about any of the sequels that you DID like?



http://www.petitiononline.com/saveorel/petition.html

reply

I like both stories. And I can't comment about The Enchanted Christmas because I've never watched it.

reply

I liked both as well.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

I liked THoND 2 (I rate it 6), but hate this (I rate it 1).

reply



BETHANY COX
"Music comes from within, from your heart and from your soul."

Enchanted Christmas 7/10
Hunchback of Notre dame 2 6/10
Cinderella 2 4/10

Cinderella 2 is the worst, the worst sequel is Return to Neverland.

reply

HoND 2 without a doubt. It was so, so awful. The trailer of the first film is better than its dreadful sequel.

"If it hadn't been for you, I would be now in someone else's digestion!"

reply

This is way worse.
I actually liked THoND 2 a bit. Like a guilty pleasure. It had one great song, some good ones, and typical, yet still okay story.

reply

Definitely THoND 2. I own it and have watched it enough, but I never watched it over and over for sheer pleasure the way I have with Cinderella 2. Sure, there's plenty to complain about, and I admit that it's a guilty pleasure. However, the art design and animation are mostly good for a sequel. I enjoy the music a great deal, although it does feel rather too "hip and modern" for Cinderella. Why they didn't try to create something more classic-sounding I don't quite know (trying to appeal to the younger generation, I suppose)...but somehow, what they've got just works. It's fun, catchy, uplifting, and isn't TOO soullessly "pop-ish" to pay tribute to the original film and its spirit.

There are a few mildly intriguing things about THoND 2, but I felt Michael McKean's awesome voice could've been put to much better use. Madeleine's incredible song by Jennifer Love Hewitt is the only truly good (read: exceptional) thing about that particular half-arsed direct-to-video sequel attempt. But what's so compelling about "Dreams Come True?" Well, the three "short stories" are actually delightful. I love seeing Anastasia (and to a small extent Drizella, at the end) become a different person and fall in love. The adventures with the mice, cats, Prince, Countess, etc., are endlessly entertaining. Cinderella's not even the star of her own sequel, when it comes down to it. I love the movie for the supporting characters, who are far better developed. To me, what really makes the movie is the first story...I've loved the hell out of dear Prudence for years. Beatrice and Daphne are great. The King is hilarious. These are the interesting characters that flesh out the sequel and provide some greater idea of what Cindy's life will be like as a princess, after the "happily ever after."

"A Twist in Time" was also quite impressive for what it was...I give that a 6.5-7. But personally, "Dreams Come True" has such a special place for me (LOVED it during high school, and shared the love with some of my friends) that I reckon it deserves at least an 8. xD Not for being perfect or a "great film" in any major sense, but for succeeding in what it set out to do. Cinderella was one of my earliest favorite films; as a child, I forced my poor grandpa to continue rewinding and playing it over and over and over again. And he would patiently watch it with me every single time through. That and "Dumbo" were probably the two that got me fully started on my lifelong addiction to Disney, animation, and awesome movies in general. You'd think that something like "Dreams Come True" would make me sick and ashamed of the Disney company for dishonoring such a classic masterpiece, but frankly...I don't feel that way about it at all. It grew on me enormously, and I just love it. But then, that's the case with most Disney sequels, for only a few are genuinely good films overall. I tend to either love them for the new characters introduced, or their deeper exploration of something...or, I dislike them overall, but can usually still pick out aspects and features I enjoyed.

reply

[deleted]

I would definitely say that "The Hunchback of Notre Dame 2" is A LOT WORSE than this movie is. This movie brings back childhood nostalgia from when I would usually work to watch this after school on Wednesday nights if I behaved in school and did my homework. I also used to script this film a lot, and work to watch "Sleeping Beauty" on Mondays, "The Little Mermaid" on Tuesdays, "Snow White" on Thursdays and "Robin Hood" on Fridays. As with "The Hunchback of Notre Dame 2", I never had much of a memory with watching that, and I always thought the songs were lousy, and the animation of THoND 2 was ugly. That sequel is a throw-away sequel, while this is not. But perhaps this may be more suitable for little girls, even though I'm a 22-year old man.

reply

The Hunchback of Notre Dame II is definitely worse, much worse. However, I don't hate it. I even enjoy certain aspects of it. In all honesty, Cinderella II isn't that bad. I personally love it, and at worst, I'd call it mediocre. And yes, Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas is much, much worse than either of these two. It's superfluous and adds nothing.

reply