The thing is Garfield: A Tail of Two Kitties doesn’t even have anything to do with the classic Charles Dickens novel. Two Kitties is more a pauper/prince type story. I guess kids probably don’t know what a “pauper” is and well The Prince and the Pussy wouldn’t really work would it? Still they could have at least come up with a clever story to go along with the title. This time around Garfield (Bill Murray) wants to stop Jon (Breckin Meyer) from asking cute-as-a-button vet Liz (Jennifer Love Hewitt) to marry him on a trip to London by stowing away. Once over the pond the fat yellow cat ends up being mistaken for a royal fat yellow cat Prince (Tim Curry) who has just inherited a castle. Sure Garfield likes all the perks--minced pie anytime he rings a bell; pampering beyond your regular tongue bath; and no Odie. There are a few downsides namely an evil relative (Billy Connolly) who wants the cat dead so he can get the estate but it doesn’t matter. Both cats are killed in the end anyway. Oh I’m kidding (I only wish). The laconic Murray is certainly a wise choice to voice the indolent fat cat and was mildly entertaining in the first Garfield. But for the Oscar-nominated actor to agree to do it again let’s just say it must have been very costly for the producers. I would hope anyway that he asked for a lot of money because why else would you do something as inane as this? The character interminably grates. There are also a bevy of British actors in Two Kitties who are equally annoying doing animal voices--from Curry as the mollycoddled Prince to Bob Hoskins as a bulldog and Sharon Osbourne as a pig. As for the human factor Meyer and Love Hewitt are gag-producing sugary sweet while Connolly just makes a complete ass of himself as the dastardly villain. It’s kind of embarrassing actually --for everyone involved. It still boggles the mind the first Garfield grossed $75 million domestically. Yes it was an understandable endeavor since the comic strip has always been immensely popular and with the advent of CGI creating the Garfield we all know and love for the screen was finally possible. But the first Garfield was so mind-numbingly ridiculous you just have to wonder what the audiences saw in it. I guess maybe it had something to do with keeping 7-year-olds occupied. Of course all the studio execs saw were dollar signs so it stands to reason they’d make a sequel. It made money dammit so we have to do it again can’t you see that? OK so let’s say we go with that reasoning hoping maybe they’ll have realized their mistakes with the first and come up with something better. No such luck. I have feeling this time around however those same execs may be disappointed. In a summer full of far more stellar entertainment for the kiddies these Two Kitties are going to thankfully fall by the wayside and put an end to the franchise once and for all.
August 29, 2003 11:06am EST
Jeepers Creepers which was released in 2001 established some basic facts about the winged monster the most important being that it eats every 23rd spring for 23 days. This sequel however is not set in 2024 but on the last of the 23 days and parallels the events of the first film on the dreaded East 9 Highway in Poho County: On the same stretch of road a bus carrying high school students returning home from a championship game become stranded when two tires on the vehicle blow out. It's not an accident but the work of the Creeper (Jonathan Breck) who then returns to the crippled bus to feast on its passengers. After the driver and coaches get picked off the kids like savory sardines in a tin box are left to fend for themselves. The only clue they have as to what's going on is through cheerleader Minxie (Nicki Lynn Aycox) who has a dream in which Darry (Justin Long)--the lead character from the first film--warns her of the Creepers intentions. The group's only salvation is a local farmer (Ray Wise) looking to avenge his son's demise at the hands of the Creeper. Fraught with fright flick clichés Jeepers Creepers 2 is not as intelligent as the first and the elements that made the original so compelling--the suspense drama and the emotional investment in its characters--are definitely lacking in this sequel.
Jeepers Creepers 2 follows a busload of basketball players and cheerleaders as well as a farmer and his son in a concurrent storyline. The problem is there are so many characters here that none of them ever get a chance to fully develop. As the film opens attention is focused on Jack Taggert (Ray Wise) as the Creeper snatches his son in a cornfield. As an actor with great range Wise best known for his stint as Leland Palmer in David Lynch's cult series Twin Peaks isn't taken full advantage of here. He's bitter about the loss of his son but the movie gets that across to the audience by intermittently showing Wise's character frantically crafting a giant spear gun. But because the film doesn't devote enough time to the character we don't share his hatred for the Creeper. Breck reprises his role here as the winged beast and if the film spawns into a successful horror movie franchise could gain cult stardom as the Creeper. Because the Creeper is more prominent than in the first film Breck gets a chance to play with the character a little more and even infuses a bit of personality into the monster. The cast of teenage characters including Aycox Lena Caldwell and Garikayi Mutambirwa all give respectable performances but sadly get lost in the mix and never become anything more than disposable targets.
When it was released in 2001 director Victor Salva's Jeepers Creepers grossed $37.9 million at the box office--commercial success for a small horror genre flick. It had a lot going for it especially compared to most slasher pics; a good story with an even more intriguing villain but its appeal rested in Salva's visual approach. The director used subtle effects to mount suspense including what he describes as a "Hitchcock reveal " where the audience is given details that the characters aren't like a shot of the Creeper in a car's rearview mirror. But in Jeepers Creepers 2 Salva overuses this effect and it becomes almost irritating. What's more the tension that came with delaying the Creepers reveal in the first film is now gone. Moviegoers see him in the first scene followed by longer glimpses with each exposure--and the more we see of him the less scary he becomes. This film does have a few things going for it one of them being Bennett Salvay's musical score. Salva does not drown the film in pyrotechnics and screeching sound effects but instead uses the musical compositions to convey the mood of the entire production. In one scene Salva provides the audience with a bird's-eye-view of the group of teens running to safety across a vast field and accompanied by the heightened score resemble a herd of wildebeest on the run. But while the film is visually interesting it ultimately fails to get the audience to care for its whole host of characters making their fate and the action inconsequential.