Shopaholic35 The second installment of the Inspector Gadget film series is fairly comparable to the first movie. Although this movie is stupider the fact that they picked a better gadget this time round was an improvement. Unfortunately the problem is the movie is just so terrible so the "better" gadget does not save it.To be honest this movie is a watch once and slightly enjoy it but then you never need to watch it again. I do think Elaine Hendrix does a god job at portraying G2 though. She gives the movie a sense of sanity that stops the movie from being a complete joke. Don't bother if you have a short attention span.

Amy Adler Inspector Gadget is back, well, kind of. French Stewart takes over the title role from Matthew Broderick, who appeared in the original live action film. In the first film, our beloved G took down arch enemy The Claw so this movie opens with G on top of the world. As a result of him being praised and awarded by the city, G has become a bit smug and too sure of himself. Therefore, he is soon arresting the police chief's MOTHER for driving 26 mph in a 25 zone. The crime is drag racing. Needless to say, G gets a chewing out from the chief (Mark Mitchell), his supervisor. Its true, G's bright niece Penny keeps her uncle more grounded, for she loves to catch criminals, too. Now, more changes occur. First, there is a new crime fighter on the force, a robot, G2, (Elaine Hendrix), who has just been invented and will be more reliable than G, whose gadgets sometimes go haywire. Although she is a mechanical being, G finds her very pretty! Then, The Claw (Tony Martin, not Rupert Everett) returns with a surefire plan to raid the Federal Reserve. All of a sudden, G lassos the mayor (Sigrid Thornton) accidentally, making her so upset that she kicks G off the force. Needing a new job, G tries his hand at everything from burger flipping to valet parking. But, can G2 truly stop The Claw on her own? Well, she is supposed to be perfect! First, I have adored French Stewart from his days on Third Rock from the Sun. He is instinctively very funny, no matter what the role, and this is one is no exception. Hendrix makes a perfect counterpoint for him while Mitchell does well as the chief. How funny to see Thornton, long after her young role in The Man from Snowy River, she is still quite beautiful! Martin has a rough voice that is hard to decipher sometimes but he makes a good villain. He gets away in the end, setting up other possible sequels. Then, the production is gorgeous, inventive, colorful and fun. Lastly, there are laughs galore for every one. Therefore, inspect this film up close by showing it to yourself or your close friends and relatives soon.

TheLittleSongbird The first film was a disappointing and mediocre film, but actually was reasonably entertaining. There has been the general impression that the sequel is better than the first film, but I can't agree. Yes, I accept it was more faithful than the brilliant cartoon show, but I still think it was a very poor sequel.The script was very very weak, and even lower in laughs than the first film. I liked the idea of Dr Claw escaping from jail, but the pace of this film was way too fast, and lacked energy as well as felt rushed. And the editing was choppy, and the effects substandard.The performances were pretty dire. French Stewart proves once again, like he did in the excrement that is Home Alone 4, that he falls well short of the charisma and energy of his character and came across as rather wooden. I didn't like Tony Martin's Dr Claw either. I much preferred Rupert Everett's suave take on the classic villain, and Martin hamming-up came close to embarrassing rather than entertaining. In fact, the only redeeming quality, and this is a slight one, is the talented Caitlin Wachs, who deserved better.Overall, very poor, don't waste your time. 1/10 Bethany Cox

Andy (film-critic) "Inspector Gadget 2" is possibly one of the worst sequels to dawn the direct-to-DVD call tag at the bottom of the box. Using nothings from the original film (not the same characters, not the same style, not the same comic timing), this film is one that you have to watch alone, not standing right next to the original Broderick vehicle. French Stewart (he is always squinting ... why?), with the aid of director Alex Zamm try to bring the original concept back the the series without any known budget. Stewart brings a new Inspector to the film, a more arrogant, snobbish, seems to be tormented by life, protagonist that cares nothing for those surrounding him. He is a character that we cannot love, no matter how many times we have to sit through one viewing of this film. What is interesting about Stewart is that he is actually closer to the the animated Gadget than the original. Zamm also tries to create a Dr. Claw that is closer to the original – but the trouble occurs with the fact that the two share very little screen time and thus there is no real chemistry between the two. Claw used to always monitor Gadget's doings, in this one, there seems to be a haphazard care as to what either is doing. Penny still doesn't have her book and Brain still isn't getting anyone out of trouble. Where is the consistency here? Too add to the mix, we are introduced to a new character "G2", the newest upgrade to the Gadget line. Like anything this riddled with clichés, there is an initial problem with the two of them, but eventually a spark misfires and Gadget is introduced to yet another love interest. Considering the problems anatomically with this couple, there is no further spark between them. The only reason the two are put in a this film are to be together, not for any other purpose. There is no sense of individualism, just flimsy cause followed by an effect that could have been predicted before the opening credits ended."Inspector Gadget 2" has not seen the best reviews, nor will it get a good one from me – it tried, but ultimately it failed. There was no purpose to create this erroneous sequel. Disney was hoping to cash in on the Broderick fan base, the younger generation that knows no better , or just to make some extra dollars to pad their bottom line, but there was no reason to resurrect this already problematic series. I hated Elaine Hendrix's mesh between "Robocop" and "Judge Dredd". She was funny at parts that were not meant to be funny, and chokingly bad at parts that were meant to draw sympathy from the audience. Perhaps it was the writing, or the campy way that it was filmed, or the cheesy ploy to get audiences to laugh, but this sequel just left me out to dry. If I had to speak positively about this film in any way, I would have to comment on the CGI which did improve a bit with this lower-budget film. I thought the idea of "freezing-time" was a fun concept equal to what Claw would do, but again, we seemed to lack the spunk and originality of the cartoon. I would never consider this franchise a remake of the cartoon, but instead their own unoriginal spin-off.I blame Disney a bit for this film because cutting corners and cost is not an excuse for making poor films. If Broderick or even the horrid Everett could not reprise their roles for this sequel, it should have just stopped there. Don't push a circular peg into a square hole, but instead we continued to push and found cheap replacements for the original. This is a very kid friendly moment that if I were 3, would probably find visually entertaining, but from a company that prides itself on making Oscar-worthy animation, I expect a higher level of distribution. French Stewart should stop working while he still is remembered for his humorous work on "Third Rock from the Sun", while the rest of this cast shouldn't even bother with another feature. I think it is bad enough that they couldn't even get Cheri Oteri back, cause, you know, she's expensive.Overall, I have to say that "Inspector Gadget 2" is a blunderment of a film, and the one star review that I am giving it is generous. There is no need for these types of films to enter into mainstream cinema. It dulls the senses for those hoping to find engrossing cinema out there, and proves that a mind isn't necessary to watch French in action. As a cinematic community, we have to put a stop to this. Zamm attempted to retain some of the originality of the cartoon, but couldn't compile a cast good enough to bring the humor, form, grace, and talent of the animated series to light. There was no chemistry between anyone, and when the clichés began to cause a horrid avalanche, I was caught with nowhere to hide. If I had to end with a thought in mind, it would be this – Claw never showed his face, this can be learned from watching the pilot "Inspector Gadget" where he had a mustache, so you shouldn't be able to see his face in the films. It is simple. It would be like creating the Smurfs live-action where they were a shade of orange instead of blue. You just don't do it. So, when it comes to this film – just don't do it. You will be happier, and no so bitter like myself.Grade: * out of *****