MovieChat Forums > Inspector Gadget 2 (2003) Discussion > Closer to the original cartoon

Closer to the original cartoon

posted 18 years ago by shspam
25 replies | jump to latest

Inspector Gadget 2 is one of the rare cases in which the sequel is better than the original movie. It's much closer to the original cartoon. Especially Claw was done a whole lot better. In the original movie he's always full in the camera, face shown etc. In IG2 we never see his face. Then there is the way more cartoony set ups, the goofier Inspector Gadget. In "Dragracing scene" in the opening is classic!
I seen many posts by people who hated this movie - but I wonder, have those people seen (and loved) the actual 80's cartoon? In which we never saw more than Claw's right hand, in which Inspector Gadget just blundered his way through while, unknown to him, Penny and Brain solved the case.

[–] cyberdynesystems101 18 years ago

French Stewert sounded more like gadget in the cartoon too. But we did ocassionally see SOME of claws face in the movie, but not all. But I agree, it's much closer to the original cartoon.

[–] YellowDTRanger 18 years ago

yeah in the cartoon Brain always follwed him while Penny would snoop around and get caught she should have gotten credit for solving the case

[–] Cmdr_Gabe_E 18 years ago

omg, i completely agree!!!
i found Inspector Gadget 2 more enjoyable and closer to the cartoon :D!
and i like French Stewart as IG too :)! Same with Penny :)!
And G2 was a nice addition too :)!
The only actor i missed from the first movie is Dabney Coleman as Chief Quimby.

'tis I! - http://www.gabe-e.com
I'm married to...http://www.myfconline.com

[–] jawsfan007 18 years ago

i havent seen this one and the first one upset me , quimby liked gadget didn't he? and the gadget mobile could turn into a car and mini van, and i wanted penny to have her computer book.

[–] RobbieValiant 17 years ago

I liked the first. You just have to understand what works in animation, won't necessarily work in the 3 dimensions needed for live action. And before you ask, yes, I was a fan of the cartoon, I watched it regularly when it was in reuns on Nickelodeon.

[–] librarian1011 17 years ago

I liked French Stewart better than Matthew Broderick (though I adore Broderick, so it wasn't him, per se...just didn't fit IMO). However, I didn't like this Claw. It just wasn't as deep or as raspy.

But overall, I'm much happier with this version as opposed to the original movie. Closer to the cartoon series, which none of us watched because it was a an intelligent drama.

Basically, if you liked the cartoons, IG2 actually works.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] professorharoldlloydhill 17 years ago

what do you mean his facial expressions

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] professorharoldlloydhill 17 years ago

french stewart had it down...broderick seemed lost...and by the way "so it would be a lot perfect" is terrible grammar.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] professorharoldlloydhill 16 years ago

i have nothing to say

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] professorharoldlloydhill 16 years ago

nothing about the orginal was close to the cartoon! it was a train wreck!

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Great_Gazoo 16 years ago

This sequel was closer to the cartoon but it sucked to the extreme. What works in animation doesn't always work in live action. Try making Ratatouille live action and it would be a complete joke.

This movie stuck too close to the source material and it turned into a complete joke. Everything about it sucked. I like the cartoon but the things that happened in the cartoon should stay there. The first film is 100x better. It took the concept of the cool cartoon show and made it an actual movie. This movie is a complete joke.

Like keeping Claw's face unseen, seriously? In the cartoon it was cool, in this movie it was lame as hell. Not menacing or scary.

[–] j_angelbaby 15 years ago

Sure the movie may have been closer to the cartoon, but as a sequel - it's sucks! Sequels are supposed to follow the first movie, and they changed everything about who John Brown was so they could make it like the cartoon. I mean, what happened? Did someone take out his brain? I don't know how he even solved the crime as stupid as he was. The first movie he was more accident prone and naive. Here, he's simply an idiot.And no girlfriend from that last movie, or even a mention? Did she die?!
And there's no story to why Claw's voice changed...Did he get his vocal cords ripped at? I mean really. You just can't change everything about the characters from the first movie and still call it a sequel.

If the first movie had been more like the cartoon, it may have not been bad. Like it stands alone. But the two do not connect at all.
*Jessica*
http://www.flixster.com/user/missjessimarie?em.id=342350871

[–] Sic Coyote 15 years ago

Okay it's not a sequel, it's the second attempt and except for all the sill colourful gunge that seems to have to be in every kids film, this was great.

----

Even if you hate Uwe Boll, give Postal a try, be offended or entertained.

[–] starz1984-1 14 years ago

are you kidding? You actually liked this movie? Yes it was close to the cartoon but it wasn't great. Matthew Broderick was great in the first movie. They left major holes, like first off, what happened to Brenda? Second, they totally didn't start the movie where the first one left off(in which you know it's a bad movie right there) and third, Dr. Claws face was shown in the first one but now you don't see it?

[–] technikaras 12 years ago

Think of this movie as a reboot, or rather erase from your memmory the first movie then watch the original cartoon episodes and then finally watch this movie. It will make sense then.

[–] Skele1029 14 years ago

I think of Inspector Gadget 2 as not a sequel persay, but a stand-alone film that tried to be more faithful to the original cartoon.

Yes, this movie was closer to the cartoon, but I wouldn't say it was better than the first movie.

To be quite honest...I saw some episodes of the cartoon here and there back when I was a kid, but I wasn't a HUGE fan of the show.

I liked the first movie's darker tone. I thought all the actors played their characters well-enough.

Like somebody else said. What works in a cartoon, sometimes, will not necessarily work in a Live-Action movie. You can be completely silly and absurd in a cartoon, but with a movie...well, as I said, it's different with movies.

When I was younger, I liked Inspector Gadget 2 when it came out. But now as an adult, I find the movie way too campy. Even as a kid, I still enjoyed the first movie more.

Basically what it comes down to. Inspector Gadget 1 is a movie for all ages. Inspector Gadget 2 is specifically a children's film.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]