Les Indians II

Okay, the original "Major League" (1989) was a great movie and the surprise hit of 1989. So, it's no surprise that not only did they want to sequelize it, but that they toned the humor down to PG level to reach a wider audience. Unlike alot of other sequels, most of the original crowd is back (including Charlie Sheen as Rick Vaughn and Tom Berenger as Jake Taylor), save for Wesley Snipes, whose role of Willie "Mays" Hayes is reprised by then-up-and-coming Omar Epps (who pokes fun at Snipes' then-rising career as an action film star in a very funny sequence with Jake Ventura).

The original film focused more on the story of a bunch of has-beens and never-will-bes trying to have "one last good day in the sun" playing for the struggling Cleveland Indians. This sequel follows similar ground, with most of the players having gained large egos from their sudden success and not caring much about the game anymore. "Major League II" seems to like to jump quickly through the story, however, so you don't get as much of a sense of what's on the line for the team like you did in the original.

The film starts with some new characters (like a new and arrogant catcher) that provide some pretty necessary tension, but soon gets rid of them to make way for broader characters (like the Japanese outfielder). Perhaps the most irritating is the brilliantly misused Randy Quaid, who plays a die-hard fan that turns coat on the team when they start to lose. The odd part about his appearance is that his character behaves and acts like a returning character, yet there was no sign of him in the first one. He even hangs out with the die-hards from the first film (remember the three man wave in the stands?), but he is totally unfamiliar that he's almost unnecessary.

The return of former-turned-current team owner Rachel Phelps is unncessary and seems like a rehashing of the tension created by her presence in the first film. He appearance midway through the film (combined with alot of other mid-mark plot changes) makes it seem like the writers and director changed their minds on the story halfway through making the film and tried to weld it all together into something cohesive.

There are alot of great lines in this film though and some truly funny parts. I think the major problem with this sequel is that it follows the superb original. If you were to watch it without constant comparison to the first, it is a pretty entertaining film and better than alot of other sequels. But I guess it must be hard to follow-up something so great that wasn't really trying to be in the first place.

Okay, I admit this film isn't quite as good as the original. But aside from that, it really isn't as bad as it's being made out to be.

In my opinion, the biggest flaw was that it was supposed to be the `very' next year, but in reality the movie was filmed five years later. This really showed with some of the characters. Rick Vaughn (Charlie Sheen) was a rookie in the first film, but he's obviously not a kid anymore in this one. When Jake Taylor (Tom Berenger) first stepped out of the taxi at the beginning of this movie, he looked so much older that it was stunning. And Margaret Whitton (Rachel Phelps) had aged so much and gained enough weight that I literally didn't even recognize her at first. All of this just took a while to get accustomed to, not to mention Willie Mays Hayes now being played by a different character. They just casually slipped that in there like we weren't supposed to notice, but I never really could accept this as being the same character that I loved so much in the first film.

As far as the comedy, it's a bit more slap-stick than the original. The character of Rube Baker (played by Eric Bruskotter) is likeable, but borderline goofy. Also, Roger Dorn's character (played by Corbin Bernsen) has transformed from an egotistical bad-boy to a wimpy cry-baby. I had trouble believing that was the same character as well.

But all of that aside, I still liked this film pretty well. It just took me a while to adjust to the changes. I enjoyed it better the second time I watched it, once the initial shock had worn off.

Major League II is a lost cause at best. It's one of those films you know will have a sequel, but you don't want there to be a sequel. You want the film to leave off on a good note and not be inhabited by sequels of lesser quality. Instead, Major League did what was predicted and made a sequel that is (a) PG and not on par with the original and (b) doesn't include all of the original actors.

I could tell from the beginning of the film that director David S. Ward, also director of the first film, really wanted to get everyone back to do a great sequel. Rene Russo and Wesley Snipes, big names in the first film, are now absent. Snipes is replaced with Omar Epps, who is decent, but not as funny as the way Snipes portrayed the character of Willy Mays Hayes.

The plot: The Indians open up next season confident because of their big surprise last year. But some changes have been made. Rick "Wild Thing" Vaughn (Sheen), the team's star player, has quit sporting his bad boy image and now has a cleaner act. Jake Taylor (Berenger), the Indians catcher, still has serve knee problems and is on his last leg (no pun intended). Roger Dorn (Bernsen) retired from the Indians to later buy the team from Rachel Phelps. And the team's oddball player Pedro Cerrano (Haysbert) has converted to Buddhism and is way more of a relaxed player.

Major League II is more or less a remake of the first film with some new little perks. The screenwriter didn't want to experiment with much so the film is just the Indians struggling at the beginning of the season to become respectable players by the end once more. When it comes to baseball movies there isn't a whole lot of originality. The end will surprise virtually no one.

The character I still find hilarious is Lou Brown (Gammon). As well as the character of the Indians announcer Harry Doyle (Uecker) who has a major alcohol problem throughout the season while announcing the games. Absolute hilarity in both of these actors.

One character I grew tired of fast was Isuro Tanaka (Takaaki Ishibashi). His on screen actors are utterly atrocious and just unfunny especially when he gets into fights with Pedro Cerrano. The obsessed, fair weather Indians fan played by Randy Quaid is nothing but annoying as well.

Several things drag Major League II in the gutter, but it still is a fair sequel. I feel that this is a beginning of an end though. I feel this is the best sequel to Major League we're going to get. It's sad. But most likely true as I've heard nothing but average to poor reviews of Back to the Minors.

Director David S. Ward wants to get Berenger, Sheen, and Snipes back for a third film but I find that highly unlikely. Berenge has gotten too old and probably lost interest. Good luck getting Sheen to put a pause on his Two and a Half Men drama to do it, Snipes is in prison till 2013, and Gammon is dead. Major League III, if it will happen, is highly unlikely. That is no error. Ward wants the film to be titled Major League III, even though chronologically it's Major League IV.

Regardless, I feel Back to the Minors will conclude the series good or bad. It looks like Major League II will be the best Major League sequel out there. This could've all been avoided if we just left the film alone where it was; a funny and clever baseball comedy.

Starring: Charlie Sheen, Tom Berenger, Corbin Bernsen, Dennis Haysbert, Omar Epps, David Keith, Margaret Whitton, James Gammon, and Bob Uecker. Directed by: David S. Ward.

Poor follow up to the 1989 hit comedy with most of the original players returning, with the exception of Snipes. (His role was played by Omar Epps here.) Uecker still has the best lines and the best scenes. Quaid continues his string of idiot roles as a bitter, drunk fan. Followed by yet another sequel in 1998.

This may not be a great movie but it is excellent craftmanship. The acting is uniformly good and relaxed and the cinematography simple but efficient. The story may be similar to the first film but it is not a copy and is quite OK for a Sunday afternoon type film.

The film flows effortlessly and seamlessly from beginning to end and there are none of those badly played/cut/directed/whatever scenes or really dull spots that reminds you it is "just a film". For this reason it is one of those films I can watch again and again with enjoyment.