Speed 2: Cruise Control

Nah, it just isn't worth watching, or renting, why? Well let's just say it didn't live up to the first one. It wasn't very fast paced, or exciting, it was very predictable. And it's mostly them on the boat, trying to get everyone out, because it is out of control. It lost most of the elements the first one had. It didn't have the 'speed' theme, it was mostly a boat out of control, how? Someone just hacked it, and there it went, it wasn't on the threat of terrorists, there wasn't the threat of a bomb explosion, and it wasn't even sinking. Where's the excitement? The movie doesn't even deserve to be called 'Speed' because there was nothing about 'speed' in it, sure it had Sandra Bullock in it, but Keanu Reeves was missing in it. If you want to see a film about a boat out of control, just watch Titanic.

Now I liked Sandra Bullock in the original Speed. I even liked her in that film where she went into a beauty pageant. But in this monstrosity, I just wanted to slap her repeatedly and say "What are you doing!?"

She is just dire. Not in acting (well... any more than usual, anyway) but just in the way her character made you want to shake her until she regained some sense. Whoever was responsible for the script needs a good beating here. Unless I am completely mistaken, her character between the events of the first film and this one, turned into a complete and total airhead bimbo.

Add in Jason Patric (who will never be leading man material) and it seems that only Willem Dafoe was having any fun. Truly awful!

But it is good to see that ocean liners, which may have to weather tropical storms, apparently have windows made of glass so easy to break that anyone can hurl themselves through them on a whim. Priceless cinema.

Avoid this one if you liked the original.

Avoid this one if you expect a thrilling sea drama.

Avoid this one if you like Sandra Bullock.

Avoid this one if....well....just avoid it.

The enormous success of "Speed" in 1994 could only create a (poor) sequel. The less we can say is that the scriptwriters have got a great narrow-mindedness. Here, the bus was replaced by a cruise ship and the movie doesn't work, partly due to this: a cruise ship can't go as fast as a bus even if it's trapped.

Then, Keanu Reeves' absence can terribly be felt. His replacement is so colorless and listless that Sandra Bullock almost steals the show from him. Moreover, as a rule, "Speed2: cruise control" is supposed to be a suspense film. Well, in this case, where's the suspense? The filmmaker doesn't succeed in creating the suspense and he even can't create a disturbing atmosphere. The end of the movie falls into the ridiculous when the ship is entering the dock and destroys everything in its path.

At the end: one of the worst sequels ever made.

I hear a lot of people say that this is a bad movie. I honestly don't think it's that bad. Alright alright, Dennis Hopper in the first movie was just the right type of villain, the kind you really hate, Willem Dafoe is certainly a great villain too. His facial expressions are just great and typical for a villain, he's just so creepy.

If you're looking for that once-in-a-decade A+ masterpiece, this movie is not for you. But if you're looking for a movie to watch when there's nothing on TV, then this is a great choice. Obviously it's not greatest movie ever made, but I've seen much worse.

I'd give it a rating of 60%, or 6/10

"Speed" was a surprise hit movie. While it cost about $30,000,000 to make, it made back more than four times the cost. So, some Hollywood executives (with a collective IQ similar to that of a gerbil) thought...'if we do a sequel, we must spend $120,000,000 on it because THAT is why the first movie was such a success'. Not surprisingly, the movie tanked and it somehow has made it to IMDB's infamous Bottom 100 list--the 100 worst ranked major releases of all time.

In the original, Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock work to prevent a bus from exploding and killing folks. Now, because this is an overbloated sequel, they've placed the story aboard a cruise ship...which is also out of control and will kill everyone unless our heroes save it....though this time Reeves refused to reprise his role. So, they cast the rather bland Jason Patric in the lead...who offered little improvement other than he was very good at using sign language in one small scene.

How bad is this film? Well, not bad enough to be on the Bottom 100 list. So why is it on the list? After loving the first film, so many folks expected more of the same...and got nothing but a dull overblown action picture with little in the way to interest viewers....and I think THAT is why it made the list....because it disappointed so badly. Instead, I wish IMDB had a list for films with the worst ratio of cost to enjoyability of the film...in which case "Speed 2" would easily make the top 100.

By the way, this sequel ended up spending nearly as much for ONE crash scene as the budget for all of "Speed"! And, after paying $11,500,000 just to obtain Sandra Bullock for this film, you can only assume that the film simply had nothing left to pay competent writers. Instead, I assume, they hired some penguins to write the script....some very, very dull and untalented penguins!