IMDb-BEWERTUNG
3,6/10
3133
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuSix years later, Ralphie has his eyes fixed on a car. But trouble is sure to follow.Six years later, Ralphie has his eyes fixed on a car. But trouble is sure to follow.Six years later, Ralphie has his eyes fixed on a car. But trouble is sure to follow.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- Auszeichnungen
- 1 Nominierung insgesamt
David Michael Paul
- Schwartz
- (as David Buehrle)
David Thompson
- Flick
- (as David W Thompson)
Shawn Macdonald
- Assistant Manager
- (as Shawn MacDonald)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Nothing about this movie is The Christmas story. The story line is horrible and the acting seems forced and strained. The father looks like he got younger rather than older. Why? Much like other sequels, it did a disservice to the original movie.
It's five years later and Ralphie Parker is now a teenager. He is learning to drive from his father (Daniel Stern). His impossible crush is the beautiful Drucilla Gootrad. All he wants for Christmas is a used 1939 Mercury model Eight convertible. He causes $85 in damage and has to repay it before Christmas Eve. His friends, Flick and Schwartz, join him in the retail workforce to earn the money.
The childhood goodness is all gone. Peter Billingsley is long gone. He doesn't even have a cameo as the adult Ralphie. There is only an older doppelganger trying very hard to do an imitation. The first one is adorable but this sequel is no longer adorable. Flick gets his tongue stuck once again and it's no longer fun. There is another leg lamp but it looks different somehow. It is nice to see Flick and Schwartz are still his friends. It's not until the tire that the movie finds a purpose. The movie still screws it up but at least it tries. Wouldn't it be better for Drucilla to work at the store and be more than an object of the story? Wouldn't the used car lot be the perfect place to get a tire? It just wraps up in a bad cheesy way which definitively makes this a bad sequel.
The childhood goodness is all gone. Peter Billingsley is long gone. He doesn't even have a cameo as the adult Ralphie. There is only an older doppelganger trying very hard to do an imitation. The first one is adorable but this sequel is no longer adorable. Flick gets his tongue stuck once again and it's no longer fun. There is another leg lamp but it looks different somehow. It is nice to see Flick and Schwartz are still his friends. It's not until the tire that the movie finds a purpose. The movie still screws it up but at least it tries. Wouldn't it be better for Drucilla to work at the store and be more than an object of the story? Wouldn't the used car lot be the perfect place to get a tire? It just wraps up in a bad cheesy way which definitively makes this a bad sequel.
It's a direct to video sequel of a famous well established film that was released 29 years after the original. If any of that sounds like a good idea I have a bridge to sell you.
This should be warning enough that this movie will suck big time.
The only reason this film was made is because you can get the first film for under $10 and newer DVD/Blu-Rays cost more. They are trying to cash in on the first film by giving you similar scenes in this "new" film. Personally I would like to see more stories from the book it was based on.
This movie deserves to have a bar of Life Buoy taped in it's mouth and forced to wear pink bunny footie pajamas for the rest of it's life.
This should be warning enough that this movie will suck big time.
The only reason this film was made is because you can get the first film for under $10 and newer DVD/Blu-Rays cost more. They are trying to cash in on the first film by giving you similar scenes in this "new" film. Personally I would like to see more stories from the book it was based on.
This movie deserves to have a bar of Life Buoy taped in it's mouth and forced to wear pink bunny footie pajamas for the rest of it's life.
Just why
Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times. Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times. Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times. Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times. Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times. Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times
Haha
Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times. Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times. Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times. Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times. Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times. Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times Sorry my review was too short a bunch of times
Haha
There's never been a sequel to The Christmas Story. You may have seen a movie you THOUGHT was Christmas Story 2, but there never was a Christmas Story 2. Daniel Stern never tried to replace Darren McGavin. There's never been a Christmas Story sequel that shovels every memorable moment into the sequel just because. There's never been a Jean Shepard soundalike that would fit right at home with a video game version of the film.
I know the filmmakers were trying hard but let's be honest, was this film really necessary? I mean, I'm sure there was a love and devotion to the film because they were huge fans of the original but if that's the case, everyone should just make their own spin on Christmas Story 2. That's what it seems like anyway.
The film takes place with Ralphie in his teen years. I will say one good thing that they did pick a decent Ralphie. Heck, I even liked Flick and Schwartz in this. Ralphie wants a car for Christmas as opposed to the Red Rider BB Gun. There's a miss opportunity here where instead of "You'll shoot your eye out" it could be something like, "You can't drive, kid" or something to that effect. Then Ralphie ends up damaging the car and the car owner wants him to pay for it so he and his friends go get demeaning jobs.
The problem with this movie is that it's not nearly as fun as Christmas Story. It tries hard, but it doesn't succeed. Ralphie even has these imagination sequences that seem too juvenile for someone at his age. They refer to Christmas Story like it was last year when it's supposed to be years later. Wouldn't they be talking about a different Christmas by now? It's just not very good. Oh, and Daniel Stern (as good as an actor he is) just comes off as annoying and I can't see The Old Man anywhere in him.
I'll end this review on a good note though. The love interest is insanely hot. I see Ralphie has good tastes. Unfortunately how he talks to her at the end is shoehorned in and-- OK I'm trying to end on a good note here. The girl is gorgeous. That is all.
I know the filmmakers were trying hard but let's be honest, was this film really necessary? I mean, I'm sure there was a love and devotion to the film because they were huge fans of the original but if that's the case, everyone should just make their own spin on Christmas Story 2. That's what it seems like anyway.
The film takes place with Ralphie in his teen years. I will say one good thing that they did pick a decent Ralphie. Heck, I even liked Flick and Schwartz in this. Ralphie wants a car for Christmas as opposed to the Red Rider BB Gun. There's a miss opportunity here where instead of "You'll shoot your eye out" it could be something like, "You can't drive, kid" or something to that effect. Then Ralphie ends up damaging the car and the car owner wants him to pay for it so he and his friends go get demeaning jobs.
The problem with this movie is that it's not nearly as fun as Christmas Story. It tries hard, but it doesn't succeed. Ralphie even has these imagination sequences that seem too juvenile for someone at his age. They refer to Christmas Story like it was last year when it's supposed to be years later. Wouldn't they be talking about a different Christmas by now? It's just not very good. Oh, and Daniel Stern (as good as an actor he is) just comes off as annoying and I can't see The Old Man anywhere in him.
I'll end this review on a good note though. The love interest is insanely hot. I see Ralphie has good tastes. Unfortunately how he talks to her at the end is shoehorned in and-- OK I'm trying to end on a good note here. The girl is gorgeous. That is all.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesDaniel Stern plays The Old Man. He was the narrator on Wunderbare Jahre (1988), which itself was inspired by Fröhliche Weihnachten (1983).
- PatzerBlack students are at Ralphie's school in 1946. Indiana schools were not integrated until 1949.
- VerbindungenFeatured in Shameful Sequels: A Christmas Story 2 (2013)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsländer
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- Câu Chuyện Giáng Sinh
- Drehorte
- New Westminster, British Columbia, Kanada(exterior Parker house)
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
- Laufzeit1 Stunde 25 Minuten
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.85 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen