Vuelven los caraduras

The Bandit (Burt Reynolds) goes on another cross-country run, transporting an elephant from Florida to Texas. And, once again, Sheriff Buford T. Justice (Jackie Gleason) is on his tail.

I loved the first film, I loved Burt Reynolds, I loved Jerry Reed and I even liked Sally Field for the first (and probably last) time in my life. But this second film just does not have the same vibe and simply does not appeal to me on the same level. An elephant? How does that have the same feel as Coors? It is just silly. It is one thing to be a comedy, but another thing to be silly.

I have not yet watched part three, but from what I hear it is even worse... with Reynolds almost entirely out of the story! What the heck? Original only, please!

I know I've mentioned before that I wasn't even going to bother writing a review for this one, but here it is: I've always wanted to like this movie. I really have. Being an enormous fan of the first, and even finding some enjoyment from the third, I still can't say I like this one. I don't know what happened here. Everyone was back, inculding the director, they had the money to back it up, and they still couldn't get it right. What made this film so atrocious? Well, I have to blame it on the writers. I also have to blame the rest of the cast for going along with it. Seriously, when the characters behave NOTHING like they did in the original and the objective is to haul an elephant(!), you know you're in trouble. I cringed every time Frog and the Bandit squabbled and I cringed whenever the Bandit would lose his cool and do something stupid. I mean, what happened to the mild-mannered, likeable, laid-back country boy that we all knew and loved from the first one? Why in the HELL did they have to make him into and alcoholic, washed-up, ego-maniac? I don't know how, but they managed to make him into one of the most unlikeable protagonists in cinematic history. There's even a ridiculous training scene where the Snowman and Frog whip the bandit back into shape to make the big run. I guess it was supposed to be funny. I found it to be a slap in the face. Sometimes Hollywood really has me scatching my head.

Now, for the Justices. Two words: Good grief. They made them even dumber than in the first, and while there are a few funny lines, it goes into overdrive and messes the whole thing up. Another thing, Buford's Canadian cousin (I forget his name) was a disgrace. Was he supposed to be gay? If so, that wasn't funny either.

I guess I've trashed this one enough. On the bright side, there were a few moments that made me giggle, but I can't remember the scenes to save my life. Please, if you consider yourself a fan of the first, avoid this one. Save yourself a lot of disappointment.

It's fairly obvious that Smokey and the Bandit II was filmed directly before (or during) the making of Canonnonball Run. Obviously they had a lot of well-known faces from the CR movie, and they had them stick around for some S&tB shots, then built a story around them as best they could. If you look at each of the cameos, you see they have no tie to the storyline, all they have in common is Reynolds and Gleason. If you want to see a much better Burt Reynolds / Dom Delouis movie, rent CR (it's hokey too, but not quite as bad as this).

Movies like this get made all the time, where a very basic plot line is sketched out, and then the rest is filled in as the writers on the set come up with it. When good ideas get scarce, they try to fill the gaps with gags on a common theme. But like any good joke, it's only funny when it is at least semi-plausible. That's what made the original Smokey and the Bandit so much fun. But S&tB II is just TOO unbelievable to be funny any more. It might appeal to 12 year olds, but the original audience of 16-25 year olds just don't find them funny.

All the negativeness of the above aside, S&tB II is still better than part III. I didn't think it could get worse, but...

As much as I liked the first movie, I find that I don't really like the second film. While the film had it's moments, especially with Jackie Gleason as Buford T. Justice, there really wasn't much to redeem this film.

Everything about the film seemed rather contrived, especially the comedy. The comedy seemed to be forced most of the time.

While I can watch the first film over and over and it never seems to get old for me, the second film wore out its welcome almost right away. I don't know, but maybe if they hadn't tried so hard with the second film to measure up to the first film it would have been better.

... which is when an unexpected hit with a big charismatic star, a simple idea, known supporting stars, and a moderate budget scores big at the box office and even with critics. The urge to make a sequel is irresistible. However, mistakes are made, bunches of cameos are crammed in and gone are the delightful and anonymous extras that made the original seem like an original road picture, there is a need to go to silly and even gross-out jokes, the plot is redundant, and the entire film just seems to scream "Look at us! Aren't we just wonderful in this wonderful film?"...and the answer is "No, you are not".

What makes this not sink below a 4/10 is that Burt and Sally are always good together, Burt is a charismatic film presence even in a bad film, and Jackie Gleason has still got it 25 years after "The Honeymooners" made early TV history.