Benutzerrezensionen

My take: Not as good as the first, but decent family fun nonetheless.

Yes we know, it's kid's stuff compared to the original, which is an enjoyable film, no less. This one follows where the original left off. Cruella "Ella" DeVille is kept in prison, and a group of scientist have altered her mind, turning her from evil to a good. Sadly, when the Big Ben rings its chimes, compassionate little Ella turns back to evil Cruella, with plots to capture more puppies for her "Poppy Coat" and for vengeance.

Of course, this one adds one more puppy to the 101 others. Sadly only one of the puppies from the first makes it here (of course, he's full-grown now), it's none other than Dipstick. Besides the dog, Cruella and her stuttering butler Alonzo (Tim McInnerny), no other character from the first film returns for this sequel. The plot, if you removed some elements, is basically similar to the first film. Making this a formulaic sequel, but let's not get to harsh in reviewing this. You got to admit it still has some entertainment value, despite the flaws. The puppies are cute, as always, and some of the laughs are well enjoyable for the kiddies.

So overall, not a brilliant flick, but a fun one for the family.

Rating: *** out of 5.

I decided that this was going to be the first movie that I took my young daughter to see. Seeing as how she is a dog lover and is riveted to the TV screen every time she sees a commercial or TV show with a puppy, I figured how could I go wrong?

I was sadly disappointed. I found that the movie tried too hard to be dark and sinister....Cruella got way too much screen time and the puppies, too little. The movie just wasn't much fun. Amazingly, my daughter got an hour or so of entertainment from this film, and then got horribly bored. We ended up leaving before the movie was finished, so I'm not even sure how it ended.

The movie was cute, but it ran way too long for the younger set who have a reduced attention span. More time should have been devoted to the puppies and their antics, and less to Cruella and her scheming. I don't believe I was the only one who felt this way....as my daughter and I were leaving the theatre, I noticed two youngsters fast asleep. Not a good testimonial for a children's film.

Save this one for a video rental so your kids can fast forward through the boring bits before they, too, fall fast asleep.

I was involved in this production in 2000, i always remember we were on location in the city under this old station , may have been Mile End , it rained for about two weeks non stop and i alway remember the water coming through the cracks of the station , the scene was the Catwalk , I remember that in between scenes everyone was looking for a warm corner to stay warm , Glenn close was very friendly with all the members around , i got talking to her for about 5-10 mins and she was the most friendliest ,nicest person you can talk to , she is up there as one the the best in dealing with the conditions and people around 10/10 for that ...

Unlike its predecessor, which was a live action version of the animated 101 Dalmatians, this version is completely new and original. However, the premise is as old as they get: boy finds girl, boy gets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl again, and they all live happily ever after. Of course, I'm not giving anything away here because the movie is not about the humans; it's about the dogs and one bird. And you can't leave out the bird. The bird is the real star of the movie. His name is Waddlesworth, and he is a MacCaw that does more than just talk -- he converses. The voice is that of Eric Idle (of Monty Python fame). Waddlesworth thinks he's a dog and cannot fly and is the comic relief for the movie, adding asides for our enjoyment.

This film is better than 101 Dalmatians, which in its own right was very good, and both children and adults will enjoy it. It is pure entertainment. My teenager and six-year-old both liked it and said Waddlesworth was their favorite character. This is typical Disney entertainment: Wholesome with just enough adult humor for mom and dad, excitement for the teenagers, and tenderness for the younger ones. Besides, who doesn't like a little puppy? This movie has 102 of them!

unfortunately,this second live action film is a pale imitation of its predecessor.it's a lot slower,and the story feels contrived.it almost seems like filler to me.there are a few comic moments,though not as many as its predecessor.i think they should have left it at the first one,101 Dalmatians.Glenn Close returns as Cruella De Vil,and is good,but has much less to do this time around.plus,her two henchmen form th preventions film are not in this one,and they added some comic relief.Gerard Depardieu is in this one,in a completely ridiculous role,and he looks quite silly,to be polite.despite its problems its still watchable.my vote for 102 Dalmations is a 5/10

This was like my favorite movie when I was a kid! Cruella was my favorite Disney villain ever! There is no one better than Glenn Close to play this larger than life character!! I loved the over the top costumes, and Glenn's charisma and exuberance while playing the role! I liked all the actors, and thighs they did their job well with their role. Also, the movie is very entertaining for all ages, fun for the kids and teens and adults! Disney did a Great job in my opinion with this film! I feel like they did a good job with both 101 and 102 Dalmatians. Would've liked to maybe see roger and Anita again, but it's not like that was a heartbreaker. 7/10.

I liked this as a child. Today, not so much. That song in the opening credits is annoying. The whole joke where the parrot thinks he's a dog is not funny. The scene where the dogs are watching Lady and the Tramp and inter-cuts between that and the couple having spaghetti and meatballs made me want to vomit. Remember it was spoofed in Hot Shots 2? That scene was funny, but not this.

Also what kind of person takes their dogs to go see a puppet show? These people act like the dogs are human.

Also, when Ioan's character gets arrested, how come his dogs get arrested with him? What kind of world is this?

And as for the scene where Cruella gets baked into a cake, I'm surprised that she didn't get burnt to death in the oven.

However, I will praise Glenn's performance. She IS Cruella.

I saw the original "101 Dalmatians" 3 times while en route from England back home to the USA and I loved it. So when I saw there was a new dalmatians movie, "102 Dalmatians," I was elated and when I saw it, I was NOT disappointed. In fact, I liked this version even better than the first. Glenn Close's performance as "Ella" who has been imprisoned for 3 years for dognapping but who received behavioral modification but reverts to "Cruella" when Big Ben's chimes go off, is delightfully dastardly. And the performance by Gerard Depardieu as the loathsome LaPelt is extraordinary. But the best performances, the ones who "take the cake" are those by the Dalmatians, real or created, especially Oddball, the spotless dalmatian puppy who is obsessed with "S-P-O-T-S." The scene where she goes berserk when she sees a black and white sweater on a puppet in a Punch & Judy show is hilarious. There were scenes in which it looked like the puppies were in real danger but the magic lies in the fact that, when you read the credits, you realize those scenes were created; no puppy was ever in danger. I recommend this movie highly and I should; I've seen it at least 7 times and I also have the video.

My 10-year-old daughter, Alexandra, writes:

I thought it was very boring, and I thought it was just a repeat of stuff from "101 Dalmatians." I couldn't wait for the movie to end. The best part was the credits at the beginning - they were cute and well done. The rest of the film is not worth watching. Thank you.

This film was pure pain. Sitting in the theater for x-amount of minutes, I was wondering when the film was going to start. All the setups were in place; typical love story, characters have to overcome their short-givings, villain has to emerge, but none of it ever initiated. By the time these things happened, I was already bored stiff and the devices were completely ineffective. In scenes that required immense tension and buildup, it felt like necessary frames were cut. Kid's stuff does not have to be this way. Children's films can be as riveting and engaging as adult ones. The excuse, "hey , its for kids," is bull. I'll take "Sword in the Stone" any day. This was terrible. I'm getting the feeling that Disney will put out anything these days. And as for the kids, the 10-year I saw this with will agree...pure trash.

Three years after being arrested and charged with dognapping, Cruela de Vil (Glenn Close) is paroled following seemingly successful behavior modification treatment that has resulted in Cruela being repulsed by even the mention of furs. Cruella's case is assigned to probation officer Chloe Simon (Alice Evans) who's reluctant to take the case due to her love of dogs as she owns two (one of whom is Dipstick from Roger and Anita Dearly) who've just had a litter including spotless Dalmatian Oddball. Curella requests employment at the 2nd Chance animal shelter run by the good natured Kevin Shepherd (Ioan Gruffudd) who's about to be evicted until Cruella provides the resources to keep the shelter afloat. While Cruella has seemingly changed, a flaw in the behavior modification causes subjects treated with it to revert to their former selves when they hear the chimes of Big Ben. Cruella eventually hears those chimes and reverts to her old self and teaming with French furrier Jean-Pierre lePelt (Gerard Depardieu) sets her sights once again on making a Dalmatian puppy coat.

1996's 101 Dalmatians didn't win over much love from critics, but it was a massive success at the box office for Disney becoming the sixth highest grossing film of 1996 making $320 million against its $67 million budget. Given those returns Disney produced a sequel, but without the involvement of the original writer and director John Hughes and Stephen Herek. 102 Dalmatians instead comes to us from director Kevin Lima who initially direct the films A Goofy Movie and 1999's Tarzan with 102 marking Lima's first foray into live-action. Made for $85 million, the movie was a box office disappointment grossing only about $67 million in the United States but thanks to the international market that number was able to stretch to $183 million but still half of what the original made due to being overshadowed by Jim Carrey's the Grinch in its second weekend and Touchstone's Unbreakable opening ahead of it. At the end of the day no one was really all that eager to revisit the live-action 101 Dalmatians with 102 Dalmatians pretty much the same movie as the first one only with superficial details changed.

Much like the first film, the movie plays to that very broad "post Home Alone" style of broad slapstick humor complete with zippy music designed to make the film seem funnier than it actually is. The movie doesn't feel like it has anything new to bring to this film and really feels more like a product designed passive consumption down to the film's hip-hop esque theme song "Diggy Diggy Dog" which reeks of marketing execs asking "can you get jiggy with something?". Glenn Close is still joyfully over the top as Cruella and there is a certainly level of novelty that comes from seeing her act out of character in how nice she is including calling herself "Ella" because "Cruella" sounds too cruel and maybe if they'd played with the idea of conflicting personalities with Ella being the Dr. Jekyll to Cruella's Mr. Hyde maybe that could've lent itself to more inspired bits but the whole conditioning plot point is dropped by the end of the third act simply so we can do the dognapping plot again only instead of wasting Hugh Laurie we're wasting Gerard Depardieu instead. There is a bit more of a conscious effort to give the dogs some semblance of personality as they're still mute but there's not much to their personalities aside from drooling, digging, or in Oddball's case self-consciousness about being a dalmatian with no spots, but it doesn't stand up against the original animated film or even other animal centric movies like the Babe movies. We also have Eric Idle voicing a Scarlet Macaw who believes he's a rottweiler and it's a running gag that "runs" WAY past its welcome. As for our leads Kevin and Chloe played by Ioan Gruffudd and Alice Evans, they're so blandly written and devoid of distinguished features at one point they act out a side by side montage with a sequence from Lady and the Tramp's Bella Notte song.

102 Dalmatians is a lazy sequel to a movie that was a lazy rehash of a film that was only okay and more notable for its effects on Disney animation than itself. There's nothing all that wrong with 102 Dalmatians as it'll probably entertain small children with its inoffensive bland indifference, but it's not going to leave kids with anything that sticks with them.

The first film was a nice one, but it is not as good as the wonderful animated classic which I found more poignant and endearing. This sequel is inferior, but not bad at all. Sure the slapstick is too much, the script has its weak spots and the plot is a tad uninspired. But the dogs are very cute here, and Eric Idle is hilarious as the macaw. The film is nice to look at with stylish cinematography and eye popping costumes(especially Cruella's), and the music is pleasant. The acting is mostly very good, Ioan Gruffudd is appealing and Gerard Depardieu while he has given better performances has fun as Cruella's accomplice. But the best asset, as it was with the first film, is the amazing Glenn Close in a deliciously over-the-top performance as Cruella, even more evil than she was previously. Overall, nice. 7/10 Bethany Cox

When the movie started, I found myself enjoying certain ideas and plot points that they had in here.

But as the movie continued to go on,(about the half way point), I found myself not liking the new cast of characters and a weak script. It's basically just the first movie, but with different characters.

The new characters are nowhere near as interesting as the original ones.

The script is basically things we have done before, but change for a sequel.

Basically, it's a been there done that sequel, and I questioned why they even made in the first place.

Disney had a good live action remake, then ruined it with a sequel!

I noticed at once that this movie really wasn't based on Dodie Smith's novel. In any case, it was a nice idea that Pongo and Perdita's son now had his own puppies. The cutest of the Dalmatians was, of course, little Snowball who was completely spotless till the very end of the film.

To be honest, I didn't know what to think when Cruella de Vil seemed to have changed completely kind. In fact I have often thought about the possibility that she could become friendly, but now that she so quickly changed into "herself" again and announced that she was Cruella once more, I almost began to be really worried about Chloe's Dalmatians.

Actually, the scene in which the puppies watched Lady and the Tramp while Chloe and Kevin had their dinner, was much better than I had expected. I also was fond of the parrot who played to be a dog, and it was incredible that the dogs had learned so many tricks for this movie.

Of course I was content that at the end the Dalmatians were saved again, but I would have liked to know what was going to happen to Cruella after she had lost her whole property. And what on earth could the dogs' home do with such a huge sum of money?

Finally, it was quite touching that Snowball also had spots at the very end of the film.

I remember loving this film as a kid. Rewatching the film as an adult, the film does not hold up. I really remember the third act of the film before rewatching the film and it is going to be the only thing I remember. There are two fun scenes in my opinion. The ending and Cruella De Vil transformation back into her evil self. Glenn close is the only great thing from the film. This is not one you need to seek out if you have not seen it.

Enormous fun for both adults and children, this film works on numerous levels: there is everything from car crashes and cake in the face to some very good (yet subtle) jokes for adults.

Glenn Close is at her sublimely evil best as Cruella (`call me Ella') De Ville.

After three years in Dr. Pavlov's Behaviour Modification Clinic she is cured of her desire for fur – even the puppy-skin fur she had so intensely desired. She even has all of her fur coats placed in the dungeon of the extraordinary castle she inhabits.

But it wouldn't be a ‘Dalmatian' movie without the subterfuge and machinations of Cruella and you know that something will change her behaviour modification. And now she needs one extra puppy (hence 102 Dalmatians) to complete her nefarious scheme this time round.

Ioan Gruffudd is instantly appealing as the hero of the film that runs the `Second Chance' dog shelter. Though he was in `Titanic' and in last year's television version (as Pip) of `Great Expectations' I didn't recognize him; well, he was ‘Fifth Officer Lowe' in `Titanic' and I didn't see `Great Expectations' so I am not terribly surprised.

Gerard Depardieu does a delightful turn as the furrier-pawn of Cruella. He prances and postures in the most outlandish and outrageous of fur clothing you have ever seen – and does it well. His 'Wicked Witch of the West' homage is hilarious.

Tim McInnerny is superb is Cruella's not-so-evil henchman – he was also ‘Alonzo,' Cruella's butler, in `101 Dalmatians' and you may also recognize him from all of the `Black Adder' Brit-Coms. He plays his usual bumbling, good-hearted, somewhat dim-witted character to great effect.

Oscars for costuming are generally given for the entirety of the costuming in a film. This is unfortunate as the clothing worn by Glenn Close is amazing – it is incredibly detailed (note her handcuffs when she is being released from the Behaviour Modification Clinic) and worthy of such an over-the-top character. Her clothing alone deserves at least an Oscar nomination.

Animation holds a special place in my heart – but comparing this film to the original animated film is like comparing apples to orangutans: it can't be done. Suffice it to say that `102 Dalmatians' is even better than the film version of `101 Dalmatians' that came out in 1996. There is a lot to like here: from the sight gags, the dialogue, and the costumes to the casting - it is a good film for the whole family.

Maybe it's because of nostalgia, but I loved this film.. Maybe even more than the first one.

I feel like adding the animal shelter adds more depth than just 100 dalmatians. I loved the chemistry between Chloe and Kevin.

It's not nearly as bad as people say. It's a fun film to sit and watch with the family.

"101 Dalmatians", in its 1996 live action version, was a very interesting movie that was part of my childhood. Even today, seeing that movie, I remember those times and, of course, it had one of Glenn Close's biggest performances. Unfortunately, I can't be so generous with this movie, that continued this story.

In fact, the first movie's script was so tightly closed that it was very difficult to give it continuity. The human characters, in this story, are totally distinct and do not appear in the first film, except for the great villain (who could not miss) and his servant, Alonso, always ready to be humiliated. It is up to them, and the dogs, to make the connection with the first story because, supposedly, the adult dogs of this movie were some of the puppies of the initial movie. Sound fragile? If it sounds, it is. The way Cruella is cured seems unreliable, but even more unlikely is the way she turns again who she has always been (even though that gives us one of the brightest scenes in this movie: Cruella in full transformation, hallucinating in the streets of London). Puppies are still cute, but that doesn't work as well as it did the first time, and the parrot can sometimes be truly annoying. Finally, I also felt a pace problem here: if the movie develops normally for the beginning, it accelerates sharply in the final half and runs to a sudden conclusion in a bakery.

What ultimately saves this movie are the excellent performances of Glenn Close (yet far from the impact she had on the first movie) and Gerard Depardieu, as one of Cruella's accomplices. The villain partnership turned out badly in the movie, but both actors showed excellent understanding in front of the camera. Tim McInnerny is still funny... but all the other actors can't keep up with this trio and just show up, talk and do what they have to do.