Inspector Gadget 2

Man, this movie was worse than the reviews (and the reviews were really bad). I thought that the first was bad enough, but when I saw this I was shocked. I can't even believe that someone could make a movie this bad, I mean I could probably make a better movie with a camera about shoelaces. This movie was a big waste of time and I sooooooo regret watching it. If only I could give it 0 out of 10. Good thing Matthew Broderick didn't sign up for this movie cause then he would be completely humiliated and considered a bad actor. The only reason I rented this movie was to see if it was worse than the first, which sucked. Anyways, I don't recommend this movie to anyone unless you're a 3 - year old idiot who eats his snot.

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.

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.

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'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........