Speed 2 - Senza limiti

An American action adventure thriller. This is a sequel to the 1994 hit "Speed" set on a slow moving cruise ship. Sadly it lacked the impetus of the original's theme-as-action. It has some very impressive stunts and it never fails to look busy, but the story is crammed with too many action events. The dialogue is clichéd and the characterization is thin, and the plot devices are overfamiliar. Jason Patric fails to impose himself as the lead which left Sandra Bullock who was sidelined into producing a frenetic character which she ends up overworking. Willem Dafoe looks the part but he acts tough without seeming tough. All in all, it's action packed but froths over. The finale does justify sticking with it because back in 1997 it was the most expensive stunt ever filmed.

I was so curious as to what they would do in the sequel of Speed, I just watched Speed today and absolutely loved it! So, I can understand why Keanu turned down the movie, first off not only the script was bad, but the coincidences were beyond ridiculous of Sandra Bullock being in the same position twice and Jason Patrick?! He was so scared of doing a great movie like The Lost Boys, but yet he couldn't hesitate to do this movie? The movie just lost it's course and didn't work on any level, if it had different characters, maybe, but these great actors should know better and check twice before signing onto these sequels.

Annie is with this new policeman, Alex, and he surprises her with cruise tickets. He is planning on asking her to marry him, but that is shortly interrupted when Willaim Defoe is now the super duper bad guy. He is upset that he designed the ships computer system but gets no credit, so guess what? He decides the best way to avenge this is to blow it up! But with Alex on board... yup... you guessed it, he's gonna stop William and save the day! Good for him!

Speed 2: Cruise Control was just a money maker that is truly a fake movie that was really sad. The acting was really bad and Sandra's character went from admirable to just plain annoying. Alex had no character or any sympathy. The explosions were lame and the plot was just beyond unbelievable, poor William, he was probably on medication when he said yes to making this movie. Well, just please stay away from this movie, it'll be a waste of your time.

2/10

I hear a lot of people say that this is a bad movie. I honestly don't think it's that bad. Alright alright, Dennis Hopper in the first movie was just the right type of villain, the kind you really hate, Willem Dafoe is certainly a great villain too. His facial expressions are just great and typical for a villain, he's just so creepy.

If you're looking for that once-in-a-decade A+ masterpiece, this movie is not for you. But if you're looking for a movie to watch when there's nothing on TV, then this is a great choice. Obviously it's not greatest movie ever made, but I've seen much worse.

I'd give it a rating of 60%, or 6/10

Nah, it just isn't worth watching, or renting, why? Well let's just say it didn't live up to the first one. It wasn't very fast paced, or exciting, it was very predictable. And it's mostly them on the boat, trying to get everyone out, because it is out of control. It lost most of the elements the first one had. It didn't have the 'speed' theme, it was mostly a boat out of control, how? Someone just hacked it, and there it went, it wasn't on the threat of terrorists, there wasn't the threat of a bomb explosion, and it wasn't even sinking. Where's the excitement? The movie doesn't even deserve to be called 'Speed' because there was nothing about 'speed' in it, sure it had Sandra Bullock in it, but Keanu Reeves was missing in it. If you want to see a film about a boat out of control, just watch Titanic.

"Speed" was a surprise hit movie. While it cost about $30,000,000 to make, it made back more than four times the cost. So, some Hollywood executives (with a collective IQ similar to that of a gerbil) thought...'if we do a sequel, we must spend $120,000,000 on it because THAT is why the first movie was such a success'. Not surprisingly, the movie tanked and it somehow has made it to IMDB's infamous Bottom 100 list--the 100 worst ranked major releases of all time.

In the original, Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock work to prevent a bus from exploding and killing folks. Now, because this is an overbloated sequel, they've placed the story aboard a cruise ship...which is also out of control and will kill everyone unless our heroes save it....though this time Reeves refused to reprise his role. So, they cast the rather bland Jason Patric in the lead...who offered little improvement other than he was very good at using sign language in one small scene.

How bad is this film? Well, not bad enough to be on the Bottom 100 list. So why is it on the list? After loving the first film, so many folks expected more of the same...and got nothing but a dull overblown action picture with little in the way to interest viewers....and I think THAT is why it made the list....because it disappointed so badly. Instead, I wish IMDB had a list for films with the worst ratio of cost to enjoyability of the film...in which case "Speed 2" would easily make the top 100.

By the way, this sequel ended up spending nearly as much for ONE crash scene as the budget for all of "Speed"! And, after paying $11,500,000 just to obtain Sandra Bullock for this film, you can only assume that the film simply had nothing left to pay competent writers. Instead, I assume, they hired some penguins to write the script....some very, very dull and untalented penguins!