They tore this movie to shreds for no good reason, IMO. It was a fun, light-hearted family appropriate fare...and the whole lot of them can't stand that. Normally, I don't go in for a overtly mainstream film, but I enjoyed Martin's first run as this character and I wanted to see him do it again. I'm glad I did, even if those sons-a-bitches arn't.
share
I agree. This movie got worse reviews than "Step Brothers"! And
"District 9" has a 8.7 rating. What's wrong with most people???
"Step Brothers" was MUCH better than this. Same goes for District 9.
shareI agree they were way too harsh on this film. I thought it deserved a lot higher than what it got.. as high as District 9.
2015
These so-called Pink Panther remakes sucked on many levels and never should have seen the light of day. The critics were correct in panning this film. Peter Sellers is dead. Let the legend rest in peace. Nobody had any interest in these films and kids and retarded people just liked watching Steve Martin flailing around trying to pronounce "hamburger" for ninety minutes.
sharePut the critics aside. The movie FLOPPED because PEOPLE DID NOT WANT TO WATCH IT. In the first one, Martin had a lot of moviegoers because audiences were curious to see his take on Clouseau. Here, they already knew how he played the role, and didn't like it. Hence, they simply passed on this movie.
You can't blame the critics here. Martin did pretty good with the first one, had his movie been good audiences would have returned for the sequel and they didn't.
[deleted]
Peter Sellers made far worse Pink Panther films than this one. or did you FORGET that he was in "Revenge of the Pink Panther" ?
No, the film isn't great. It's got plenty of great moments, and I like the chemistry Martin and Reno have in it. I'd say two and a half stars is fair. Good, worth watching, not brilliant.
And I like how you say "Nobody with interest in films---" like a pretentious snob. Your like one of those *beep* in film classes who gush orgasmically about *beep* like "Donnie Darko" and talk about how they "Understand" movies better. Just an excuse for elitism. Not even a true snob, either. One who thinks film ends and begins with Hitchcock and Kurasowa, and talk about Fritz Lang despite only knowing about 'M' and 'Metropolis'.
Anyone with interest in film has seen good, and has seen bad. And if you have seen bad, and I mean really been through the depths of hell, you realize that this is just kinda dumb, fun, and watchable. The scene with the pope? Hysterical. This film goes down in the dumps while movies that feature robots peeing on people have mainstream appeal? That's blasphemy.
Explain then why the first movie did good while this sequel flopped so horribly that the studio never even said what it budget was. Sorry if you feel this so personally, but it wasn't just "snobs" that dissed the movie: even the people that watched the first one didn't like the sequel.
share
The movie flopped because there wasn't any interest. Really, that's it.
Also, it opened against Coraline. No PG Rated film was going to have a good opening against Coraline. Because the target demographics spill over too much.
What they should have done was opened a few weeks later, because there was an empty space in the release schedule. It would have had little to no competition against "Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun Li" which was hands down one of the worst movies of the year.
[deleted]
i would say this film sucked, but that would be an insult to films that sucked.
What the $%*& is a Chinese Downhill?!?