THE FOLLOWING REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS OF THE DISCUSSED FILM. READERS DISCRETION IS ADVISED.
The 1996 adaptation of 101 Dalmatians was a surprise box office success, and that is the only reason it got a sequel. Was it good? Hell no.
PLOT
102 Dalmatians takes place years after Cruella De Vil was arrested for attempting to kill 101 dalmatian puppies to make her own fur coat. She seems to have been cured from her own obsession of fur after shock therapy, leading to be released from a mental institution. But if she breaks parole, her fortune will go to all dog shelters in Westminster. Her own probation officer Chloe believes she hasn't changed, out of sake of her own dalmatian Dipstick was one of the 101, bought by her from the Dearly plantation. Her second dog, Dipstick's mate, Dottie, gives birth to three puppies: Little Dipper, Domino and Oddball. Cruella continues to show her change by purchasing a dog shelter to save it from insolvency. Her new perspective comes to an end as the Great Bell rings in her presence, causing her to revert back to former self. This only happened as therapy subjects like her revert once exposed to loud noises. Chloe begins a relationship with Kevin, whose shelter was bought by De Vil. The returning villain chooses to resume her plan to make the fur coat by assigning her butler Alonzo (Tim McInnerny) and French furrier Jean-Pierre LePelt to steal 102 of the same species of puppies as before. She even frames Kevin for the dognapping in which the authorities wouldn't think twice about, due to a prior attempt of dognapping in his record. As that happens, Chloe is invited by Cruella for her and her dog Dipstick to attend a decoy party. This would be a distraction as LePelt abducts Dottie and her three puppies. De Vil attempts to trap her when she finds out, but she is later freed by another dog. Kevin is able to break out of prison, with the aid of his pet macaw Waddlesworth. When he meets up with Chloe, he does explain that his prior conviction was breaking free dogs that were being experimented in a lab. Believing him, they go back to their house and discover that it's too late as her dogs are already taken. However, they find a train ticket left behind LePelt, revealing that the villains and the dogs are heading to Paris. Dipstick tries to save his family but is also captured as well at the train station. When De Vil discovers Oddball to be spotless, she has Alonzo to kill her. But when he fails, he lies to her, planning his transition of turning against her. When our protagonists make it to Paris, they follow the antagonists to LePelt's fur coat factory. Waddlesworth and Oddball find the cellar where the other dalmatians are held captive. Kevin and Chloe are temporarily trapped when Cruella spots them. Alonzo officially turns on her boss when confronting LePelt, and he succeeds as he falls into the floor. When she notices the dogs escaping, she goes after them. She follows them to a bakery, which is a trap for her as she is baked into a cake and survives. After that, she and LePelt are arrested. The film ends some time later where we see Alonzo award Kevin Cruella's fortune and we see them along with Chloe discovering that Oddball finally gained spots.
THOUGHTS
Looking back, I really wish I can say this sequel was decent like its predecessor. But after giving it a chance after missing out on it during childhood, I hate to say that this one isn't even to be creative. I mean it doesn't any momentum was at hand as I honestly got bored very quick. The fact that I was able to pay attention surprises me because it doesn't deserve it, that's how much I don't like it. This isn't even at a guilty pleasure level of entertaining like Transformers, yes, it's that's bad. There is just no creativity at hand and I cannot stand it. Director Kevin Lima fails to make this movie as entertaining as it's supposed to be. I want to like this cast but they are barely holding it down. The fact that this movie has an Oscar nomination for Costume Design blows my mind because they're hardly interesting compared to the predecessor. Glenn Close is the only reason why this movie is somewhat watchable for average viewers. She still pulls it off making the iconic villain just as despicable and psychotic she's supposed to be. If I was an adult watching this in the year of its release, I feel like I'd be open minded if the franchise immediately went another direction, as in her breaking out and going after the Dearly plantation, because that actually makes sense unlike the plot of this film. While she holds it down, I can't say I enjoy the rest of the cast. I do not like Alonzo at all because his transition from bad to good was rushed, not earned. So the fact that he isn't in a cell despite his involvement surprises me. Gerard Depardieu annoyed me so much as LePelt, I was so close with the decision of turning it off. I mean why do we need this character when you could've brought back Horace and Jasper. I honestly did enjoy the chemistry between Ioan Gruffudd and Alice Evans, but they are just a replacement of the prior couple which again makes me say they should've brought the original cast. The main reason I can't get into this movie is because this story is all over the place. First off, Eric Idle is infamously funny with Waddlesworth but the macaw having an identity crisis makes no sense in the end. How does a bird believe to be a dog? You have wings, not paws. It feels like this joke is testing my intelligence. I want to care that Oddball feels alone due to being spotless but I don't because it's not the main focus. If her story was primary, I'd have a better time on board. Sure it's supposed to be funny how her clumsiness gets her in trouble, but how did she get stuck to the balloons? If you're willing to imply how this puppy has the worst of luck, please explain how that happened. If Cruella wanted to prove her to change of heart, why doesn't she get rid of her black and white clothing? It would've not lasted, but it'd be interesting to see that aspect of her effort to change. I normally ignore many coincidental events that occur in movies but seriously, what are the odds for Cruella's probation owner to own one of the original 101 to be dognapped by her? It just gets irritating at this point. Is Cruella really a witch? Because seeing her regain her original personality looked like she was becoming a witch as she grew claws and gained shoulder pads, after Big Ben triggers her to change. Also, there is no way Cruella remembers Dipstick from the 101 she held captive. Don't want to sound offensive but all those dogs look the same, there's no chance to remember or recognize one. If it's witch related, someone please explain this to me. It's never gonna be answered how it's a success to steal exactly 102 of the titular species but why this particular amount? If this were to have a 'roll credits' moment, than that's just lazy. Honestly, LePelt should've called off the abduction if Dottie was present with her puppies. I mean it could've been worse because if more dogs heard, summoning a Twilight Bark in the process, Dipstick would've ran for it and stopped him. Also, why were Kevin's dogs in a cell with him when he got arrested? I don't want them to be in a pound, but it is realistic if they were and break out anyway. And lastly, I was feeling such cringe seeing Cruella become a giant cake, because she should've died in that oven. It's almost as if this was pitched in a cartoon and we get it in live action anyway. To get it worth, 102 Dalmatians is one of the worst sequels to be made as it doesn't try to be anything, rather than just present itself as a random cash grab. If you truly love the prior adaptations, I assure you that you won't like this one.
Comments