IMDb-BEWERTUNG
3,5/10
7545
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuInspector Gadget returns in this sequel to the 1999 hit. A glitched Gadget once again must fight his arch nemesis, Claw, with the aid of a female Gadget: G2.Inspector Gadget returns in this sequel to the 1999 hit. A glitched Gadget once again must fight his arch nemesis, Claw, with the aid of a female Gadget: G2.Inspector Gadget returns in this sequel to the 1999 hit. A glitched Gadget once again must fight his arch nemesis, Claw, with the aid of a female Gadget: G2.
- Auszeichnungen
- 4 Nominierungen insgesamt
Mick Roughan
- Jungle Bob
- (as Mick Roughlan)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
I'm afraid I have to agree with much of Ericho's comments. This film just appeared shoddily made, and just looks like a budget price sequel compared to the first film which had Matt Broderick and Rupert Everett who frankly are in a different league to the acting in this film.
In the first live action film, Gadget was genuine and well intentioned, but a complete bumbler. In this film though, he just comes across as an arrogant, self-righteous, irritating pillock. His actions in the opening scenes of the film, persecuting an old granny for exceeding the speed limit by 0.3mph just destroy any sympathy for the character.
As for Claw, well they have attempted to bring the character more into line with the cartoon portrayal. Fair enough, but there's no explanation at all of how he has changed from the suave businessman Sanford Scolex of the first film into the shady character with the croaky voice in this. Also there's no menace at all in the acting of the character, which just appears to be some guy in a trenchcoat waving his claw around randomly, with a voiceover added later!
Also, what happened to Brenda Bradford who developed the Gadget technology with her Father? In the first flick, she was the love of Gadget's life and the film ended with them together, yet there's not even a mention of her in this film. Are filmakers so arrogant nowadays that they can't be bothered to provide even a flimsy explanation?
They really shouldn't have bothered making this, but it appears as though the studios are more than willing to dish out any rubbish to a child audience!
Mind you Elaine Hendrix does provide some eye candy as G2, but that's another matter........
In the first live action film, Gadget was genuine and well intentioned, but a complete bumbler. In this film though, he just comes across as an arrogant, self-righteous, irritating pillock. His actions in the opening scenes of the film, persecuting an old granny for exceeding the speed limit by 0.3mph just destroy any sympathy for the character.
As for Claw, well they have attempted to bring the character more into line with the cartoon portrayal. Fair enough, but there's no explanation at all of how he has changed from the suave businessman Sanford Scolex of the first film into the shady character with the croaky voice in this. Also there's no menace at all in the acting of the character, which just appears to be some guy in a trenchcoat waving his claw around randomly, with a voiceover added later!
Also, what happened to Brenda Bradford who developed the Gadget technology with her Father? In the first flick, she was the love of Gadget's life and the film ended with them together, yet there's not even a mention of her in this film. Are filmakers so arrogant nowadays that they can't be bothered to provide even a flimsy explanation?
They really shouldn't have bothered making this, but it appears as though the studios are more than willing to dish out any rubbish to a child audience!
Mind you Elaine Hendrix does provide some eye candy as G2, but that's another matter........
Okay, I'm gonna admit it right here and now. I liked the first IG. I know most people hate it, but I thought it was a very nice little movie. But THIS. This was just plain silly!!
Nothing at all made any sense at all. Okay, now I thought in the first movie, John Brown/Inspector Gadget got a girlfriend, but WHERE IS SHE IN THIS MOVIE???!!! Second of all, how the heck could a human guy like IG fall in love with a robot??!!! What the heck where the writers thinking??!!!!! How could a human/robot breed with a robot?! ROBOTS HAVE NO REPRODUCTIVE ORGANS!!! The whole thing was totally whacked! And IG was just annoying in this movie!!! He was nothing but a smart-aleck know-it-all who was stupid and totally unfunny. Sheesh, what in the world happened to him after the first film?? And I hate what they did with Claw. How come in the first movie, he talked normal, but in this movie he has that wierd robot voice. Also, how come he turned into an old man? WHAT THE HECK WAS GOING ON HERE??!!!!
Overall, this movie was just dead awful to me. It made no sense at all. This piece of crap gets a big fat, 1/10!!! Once again, I apologize to "The Secret Of Nimh". This movie, along with MST3K's "Invasion Of The Neptune Men" were worse.
Nothing at all made any sense at all. Okay, now I thought in the first movie, John Brown/Inspector Gadget got a girlfriend, but WHERE IS SHE IN THIS MOVIE???!!! Second of all, how the heck could a human guy like IG fall in love with a robot??!!! What the heck where the writers thinking??!!!!! How could a human/robot breed with a robot?! ROBOTS HAVE NO REPRODUCTIVE ORGANS!!! The whole thing was totally whacked! And IG was just annoying in this movie!!! He was nothing but a smart-aleck know-it-all who was stupid and totally unfunny. Sheesh, what in the world happened to him after the first film?? And I hate what they did with Claw. How come in the first movie, he talked normal, but in this movie he has that wierd robot voice. Also, how come he turned into an old man? WHAT THE HECK WAS GOING ON HERE??!!!!
Overall, this movie was just dead awful to me. It made no sense at all. This piece of crap gets a big fat, 1/10!!! Once again, I apologize to "The Secret Of Nimh". This movie, along with MST3K's "Invasion Of The Neptune Men" were worse.
if u look at this movie and you are a fan of the cartoon you will notice that this movie is very closer to the cartoon then the first one. that said it is just an avarage movie funny but too stupid and the lead actor French Stewart is bad but to be honest makes a better gadget them matthew broderick. claw is protrayed better by the director and writer.. for exsmple in the cartoon you never see claws face and he always escapes...
all in all so bits of this movie should have been in the first one and if they had it would have turned the first one into a better movie... it is fun but dont watch it as a sequel watch it as another adventure.
all in all so bits of this movie should have been in the first one and if they had it would have turned the first one into a better movie... it is fun but dont watch it as a sequel watch it as another adventure.
I preferred the original, mainly because the characters were better, since the actors where just right, and i don't care if it wasn't as close to the cartoon, the elements from the cartoon that were changed made the film better (the gadget mobile had a wise-ass attitude which was great). Like I said before, I think Matthew Broderick was loads better than the current Inspector Gadget and so was were all the rest they change (especially claw!) i have to say, see the first, its loads funnier.
I used to watch the Inspector Gadget Television show all of the time, and so going into the first movie I was hoping it would retain certain elements of the show. However, that first movie changed so much (the most notable being the odd reworking of Dr. Claw) that it didn't feel like Inspector Gadget anymore.
This movie, on the other hand, is excellent, because it discards trying to be in continuity with the first in order to be much more like the show. The character dynamic of the show (including the faceless villian) has been restored. Now, Gadget is once again a bumbling idiot who is saved only by those around him. At first I thought the inclusion of G2 would hamper the film, but her part is well integrated and this is still Gadget's movie. It's very funny, silly, and stylized, and probably good enough to have been in theaters. Forget about the continuity errors in relation to the first film, and enjoy live-action Gadget the way it should have been in the first place.
**** out of ****
This movie, on the other hand, is excellent, because it discards trying to be in continuity with the first in order to be much more like the show. The character dynamic of the show (including the faceless villian) has been restored. Now, Gadget is once again a bumbling idiot who is saved only by those around him. At first I thought the inclusion of G2 would hamper the film, but her part is well integrated and this is still Gadget's movie. It's very funny, silly, and stylized, and probably good enough to have been in theaters. Forget about the continuity errors in relation to the first film, and enjoy live-action Gadget the way it should have been in the first place.
**** out of ****
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesDr. Claw's face is never shown throughout the entire course of the film. This is a reference to a running gag from the original Inspektor Gadget (1983) TV series. Only his eye is shown for a spilt second.
- PatzerWhen Dr. Claw uses his weapon, time freezes all over the city of Riverton, showing several actions stopping in mid-motion and remaining in position. This means that the electronic devices in the building of the federal reserve - the gate, retina scan and the vault door - should be inoperable and impossible to function.
- Crazy CreditsThere are no opening credits, save the title.
- Alternative VersionenThe original video rating was PG, though it was re-rated to G after a few cuts were made to violence.
- VerbindungenEdited into Inspector Gadget 2: Deleted Scenes (2003)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsländer
- Offizieller Standort
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- IG2
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 17.500.000 AU$ (geschätzt)
- Laufzeit1 Stunde 29 Minuten
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.66 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen