stormhawk2018
Someone please explain why the hell we have been delivered George of the Jungle 2. The silliness of the first one, coupled with Brendan Fraser's enjoyable slapstick, John Cleese's voice-over and Thomas Haden Church's funny portrayal of the villain is what made the film so fun, yet all of threat was taken away. No more Brendan Fraser. No more funny silliness. No more laughable antics from Haden Church, and Cleese is put to no good use as Ape the Ape. And to make matters worse, GotJ2 insists on assuring the viewers that the film is a sequel, a Disney sequel, and a Disney sequel without Brendan Fraser, this time with the less-famous Christopher Showerman, who isn't even closer to Brendan; which is extremely unprofessional and even more tiring and boring to watch and listen to. The narration is terrible and the subplot of teaching Geroge's young son, portrayed by Angus T. Jones (Jake from "Two and a Half Men") how to rope swing falls flat, just an excuse to advertise toy products for the boy, which was probably the film's main source of funding, because I don't know who the hell would want this film on their credits list. A shame, a mess and not worth the time or effort it takes to watch it. This film is terrible, don't see it and if you have... may God have mercy on you.P.S.: To the positive reviewers of this film, I'm sure that you're appealed to one of the Lyle's henchwoman, especially the blonde, who looks like Melissa Joan Hart, because the actress was born in 1978 (MJH was born in 1976). If you want actresses born in 1978 go to watch a Japanese TV show called "Jiban" (a Robocop-inspired series), because a child actress who portrays a character named Mayumi was born on '78.
lqe
Let me start out by saying this movie has 1 funny point at the very beginning with the exchange between the narrator and George: Narrator:Huh? Wait a minute! Who the heck are you? George: Me new George. Studio too cheap to pay Brendan Fraser. Narrator: How did you get the part? George: New George just lucky, I guess. Sadly, that's the only funny part in the entire movie.It was still entertaining...But then again, i'm easily entertained...I wouldn't say this is the worst movie i've ever seen (that title goes to the terribly un-funny Disaster Movie...), This movie falls #7 on my bottom 15 list...If your a small child who is easily entertained, you'll enjoy this movie. If you're a movie-watcher who wants a good, funny movie, You'll end up shooting yourself halfway through this one..
xredgarnetx
Caught part of GEORGE 2 on TV recently, but couldn't get myself to watch it through to the end. Just awful! I can't even remember the plot. All I know is that George and Ursula were not the George and Ursula of the first movie, which was bad enough. There's a lot of scrambling around, but the direction and editing were so shoddy and choppy, it was like watching outtakes or deleted scenes. Having the original voice of Ape the Ape back was not nearly enough to make me warm up to this. GEORGE 2 is probably the single worst sequel I have ever seen, and that is saying something. Jeez, because of IMDb's 10 lines rule, I have to keep typing when I have nothing more to say about this crapulastic made-for-TV sequel. Disney, hang your head in shame.
ctweb
Could have been funny, but our family was turned off by the bathroom humor of this supposedly "G" movie. It wasn't enough to have people kicked in the genitals or be urinated on. No, one of the scenes includes birds defecating on the animals and a treaty to fix it. One of the fight scenes includes throwing wet animal feces and using fiery flatulence as a flamethrower. This movie is not appropriate for children under age of 13.Disney seems to have departed from the old slapstick humor guidelines of getting hit with something wet/messy that is not gross. The same plot and fight could have been done with rotting fruit and not changed the overall theme of the movie
AD
