A little better than the first one. Again, the plot’s super basic and there’s not a beat you can’t predict, but there’s enough visual creativity and wit to make up for that. The set pieces are improved, the camerawork is smoother and they wisely dialed back the slapstick. It’s surprisingly mellow at times, you can defintely feel the Charlie Kaufman influence next to the other two. These movies really know how to use colour, especially the use of red is very striking, particularly in the third act. The villain is also much more memorable, I love the design of the peacock, and him being voiced by Gary Oldman is great (even though he lacks a proper motivation). So it fixes most of the problems I had with the first one, even though it lacks the risk taking and emotional substance that would elevate it beyond being just pretty decent.
Shout by JordyVIP 8BlockedParent2022-09-11T09:31:55Z— updated 2024-03-07T22:38:04Z
A little better than the first one. Again, the plot’s super basic and there’s not a beat you can’t predict, but there’s enough visual creativity and wit to make up for that. The set pieces are improved, the camerawork is smoother and they wisely dialed back the slapstick. It’s surprisingly mellow at times, you can defintely feel the Charlie Kaufman influence next to the other two. These movies really know how to use colour, especially the use of red is very striking, particularly in the third act. The villain is also much more memorable, I love the design of the peacock, and him being voiced by Gary Oldman is great (even though he lacks a proper motivation). So it fixes most of the problems I had with the first one, even though it lacks the risk taking and emotional substance that would elevate it beyond being just pretty decent.
6.5/10