Huh, unexpected
For those who don't wanna read it all: not as bad as I would've thought. You can see it once and forget about it. I've seen some critics as to why this one is worse than the first part, but thats wrong and I'll talk about that too, at the end. People got super-hyped by the "cameos" of all the known characters (no matter how sht the story itself was) and now they are sad for different motives. Basically, they went from "oh, wow, I know this one. And this one. And this one!" to "wait, what? I don't know this story, it seems new. I don't like new..." :))
After the sht-show that was Part 1, I wasn't expecting much. But its a lot better. Still not "good", but better. And I'll say this here, because I must say it again and again. I'll talk about the movie's quality, not the enjoyment factor. Those are NOT the same. You can enjoy bad media, and thats ok (aka "my guilty pleasure"). Just make sure you know it is bad.
So. Visuals. Meh. That weird filter is gone, but now its just passable. The colour palette is a bit better. The cinematography is a bit better. VFX are meh. So, basically, those 3 (ok, maybe a couple more) super amazing shots and effects from the first movie are gone, but now we get a lot more mid stuff. Don't get me wrong, still lot of sht/meh, but the ratio is a bit better. Oh, still here, the fight choreography is meh, still lots of dumb techniques and clearly wire-moves. Because I forgot to say that it was sht in my Part 1 review :))
Audio. Meh/decent. Definitely an upgrade. Because now there is one. Also a couple of decent songs.
World-building still sht. New characters appear and you must acknowledge them, no matter what their backstory is. Period. The pacing is a bit better. It feels like a proper story. The production value seems high, again.
And now the main stuff. The script is meh. A lot better, for sure, but it is meh. At least now a couple more stuff makes sense. Yes, still some plot devices, plot contrivances and plot holes, but fewer. Also, some plot points were predictable, you can see what they'll try to do from the first 10-20 minutes. The same for the ending. Being an Chinese movie, I was expecting it. But a very big surprise: there is character development. Yes, I was shocked. And they tried to do it for more than one character. Are they amazing, or even good? No, not really. But at least there is something to be working with. Basically, the story got a tiny bit better, the storytelling got a tiny bit better and some execution got a bit better. But is it good? Still, no. You could call it not boring. If you're watching it right after the Part 1 with and all that "all glitter, no substance" approach, its at least enjoyable. Yes, the Part 1 had 1 extra amazing acting and VFX, for the same one, but the rest was just fluff, whereas now we got a somewhat "decent", if you will, movie.
Lets talk about something for a minute. A lot of criticism is that this movie is not the same as the source. Well, I haven't read the source and I can't say, but: the source and the new format can't and shouldn't be the same. What works in a book, it might be difficult to render in animation. What works in animation, might look silly in live-action. Every format has its pro and cons. A good (I won't even say "great") storyteller (producer/director/screenwriter) should be capable of such feat.
And I'll give some examples for easier tracking. Tolkien, Lord of the Rings. The director (that also had a part in rewriting it) made some changes. Two chapters became an whole arc, the ending got axed, complete character make-over, and so on and so forth. Jurassic Parc. The movie is completely different than the movie, because the director used character development. You would've assumed that the visuals would've been the most important part, but the director understood that a great story must also make us care about its characters. Another example: any movie adaptation of books by Stephen King. It is known the the author hates at least one movie, said they changed his book. Guess what? He make a TV show, the way he wanted to, and it was sht. His way of writing is very difficult to put in a movie as is. Because as I said earlier, what works in a book, it might not be doable for a movie.
And back to this movie. Was a lot changed? I don't know, it could be. Does it matter? No, not really. Sure, a point could be made that if you're gonna change it that much and not resemble the original work, you could just NOT do it at all.
So, to wrap it up. It gets a rating of 5. Kinda meh all-over. Re-watching? No, not really? Enjoyment value? I don't think so. The "fans" will hate it because it was changed, the "normal" viewers won't care enough. So it really is up to you.
Have a lovely day.
After the sht-show that was Part 1, I wasn't expecting much. But its a lot better. Still not "good", but better. And I'll say this here, because I must say it again and again. I'll talk about the movie's quality, not the enjoyment factor. Those are NOT the same. You can enjoy bad media, and thats ok (aka "my guilty pleasure"). Just make sure you know it is bad.
So. Visuals. Meh. That weird filter is gone, but now its just passable. The colour palette is a bit better. The cinematography is a bit better. VFX are meh. So, basically, those 3 (ok, maybe a couple more) super amazing shots and effects from the first movie are gone, but now we get a lot more mid stuff. Don't get me wrong, still lot of sht/meh, but the ratio is a bit better. Oh, still here, the fight choreography is meh, still lots of dumb techniques and clearly wire-moves. Because I forgot to say that it was sht in my Part 1 review :))
Audio. Meh/decent. Definitely an upgrade. Because now there is one. Also a couple of decent songs.
World-building still sht. New characters appear and you must acknowledge them, no matter what their backstory is. Period. The pacing is a bit better. It feels like a proper story. The production value seems high, again.
And now the main stuff. The script is meh. A lot better, for sure, but it is meh. At least now a couple more stuff makes sense. Yes, still some plot devices, plot contrivances and plot holes, but fewer. Also, some plot points were predictable, you can see what they'll try to do from the first 10-20 minutes. The same for the ending. Being an Chinese movie, I was expecting it. But a very big surprise: there is character development. Yes, I was shocked. And they tried to do it for more than one character. Are they amazing, or even good? No, not really. But at least there is something to be working with. Basically, the story got a tiny bit better, the storytelling got a tiny bit better and some execution got a bit better. But is it good? Still, no. You could call it not boring. If you're watching it right after the Part 1 with and all that "all glitter, no substance" approach, its at least enjoyable. Yes, the Part 1 had 1 extra amazing acting and VFX, for the same one, but the rest was just fluff, whereas now we got a somewhat "decent", if you will, movie.
Lets talk about something for a minute. A lot of criticism is that this movie is not the same as the source. Well, I haven't read the source and I can't say, but: the source and the new format can't and shouldn't be the same. What works in a book, it might be difficult to render in animation. What works in animation, might look silly in live-action. Every format has its pro and cons. A good (I won't even say "great") storyteller (producer/director/screenwriter) should be capable of such feat.
And I'll give some examples for easier tracking. Tolkien, Lord of the Rings. The director (that also had a part in rewriting it) made some changes. Two chapters became an whole arc, the ending got axed, complete character make-over, and so on and so forth. Jurassic Parc. The movie is completely different than the movie, because the director used character development. You would've assumed that the visuals would've been the most important part, but the director understood that a great story must also make us care about its characters. Another example: any movie adaptation of books by Stephen King. It is known the the author hates at least one movie, said they changed his book. Guess what? He make a TV show, the way he wanted to, and it was sht. His way of writing is very difficult to put in a movie as is. Because as I said earlier, what works in a book, it might not be doable for a movie.
And back to this movie. Was a lot changed? I don't know, it could be. Does it matter? No, not really. Sure, a point could be made that if you're gonna change it that much and not resemble the original work, you could just NOT do it at all.
So, to wrap it up. It gets a rating of 5. Kinda meh all-over. Re-watching? No, not really? Enjoyment value? I don't think so. The "fans" will hate it because it was changed, the "normal" viewers won't care enough. So it really is up to you.
Have a lovely day.
Was this review helpful to you?
