|Page 1 of 7:||      |
|Index||65 reviews in total|
20 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
A Truly Nice Film, 2 February 2006
Author: ccthemovieman-1 from United States
I liked this better than the original, and that''s a high compliment
because I thought highly of the original film: Stuart Little. As good
as that was, I just thought this was even better.
All the voice-overs are excellent with Nathan Lane having the best lines as "Snowball," the cat. He was simply hilarious, line after line.
The film once again features great colors, a virtual rainbow of them, especially with some of the inventive rooms in the Little house. The parents, once again, are super nice. It's a treat to watch Geena Davis and Hugh Laurie play an old- fashioned "Leave It To Beaver"-type couple. The film has no objectionable material and leaves you with a nice feeling. There are animated films or animated/real life combinations like this, that advertise "family-friendly viewing" but don't really deliver, instead sneaking in sexual innuendos and the like.
Not here. This one is pure, morals-wise, except for one scene near the end when the mom (Geena Davis) tells Stuart and their son she's still proud of them even though they just got caught in a big lie. (Inferring that the lie was okay since everything turned out okay.) Other than that, nothing but good messages were heard and seen all around and this is a funny movie, to boot. Highly recommended for the family, and that's no cliché.
13 out of 15 people found the following review useful:
This "Little" goes a long way., 2 March 2003
Author: Victor Field from London, England
While less isn't always more, the makers of "Stuart Little 2" resisted the
temptation to pad it out from its shorthand running time, meaning it goes by
quickly and painlessly. Not that the actual plot of this followup to the
original charmer is hard to take in itself (Stuart is starting to feel a bit
left out, and when Margalo the wren literally drops into his life he gets a
In terms of technical levels it's only slightly easier to fault (Margalo looks a bit too cartoonish to be real, unlike Stuart Little himself and the falcon that's the movie's villain - but then again, Melanie Griffith [the voice of Margalo] always seems like a cartoon anyway), but the story by screenwriter Bruce Joel Rubin and the movie's producer Douglas Wick is what makes this ultimately inferior to its predecessor; what helped drive "Stuart Little" was our hero's wish to be accepted by his human brother and by the cat - sneer all you want, but the family message was hard to ignore. For the sequel it's more standard - the friend who's acting out of ulterior motives at first but then turns out to be a real friend, etc. Stuart isn't so much the protagonist this time, and it hurts a little.
So the freshness is reduced, but this still isn't stale - the charm and humour of the first movie remains, Michael J. Fox and Nathan Lane are as adept as ever as Stuart and Snowbell ("This better be important." "Margalo is missing." "I'd better be more specific - I meant important to ME."), and the human Littles remain just right - loving but not without making you want to slit your own throats. HBO Family has recently aired an animated version with all the principals except Hugh Laurie absent - it'll have to go a long way to live up to the two movies. (In-joke for score fans: Alan Silvestri slips in a quote from his "Back to the Future" theme in the climax.)
But I can see why this didn't do as well at the box-office as it should have - having a soccer match plus including Gilbert O'Sullivan AND Celine Dion on the soundtrack was asking for trouble...
10 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
cute kid's movie, 24 December 2003
Author: Charles Herold (cherold) from United States
Some cartoons, even those aimed primarily at children, are still well worth seeing for adults. I was hoping Stuart Little 2 would be one of those, but it falls just a little short of the mark. It's cute, and it's funny enough to have kept me from turning it off, but it's a kid's movie all the way. If you're a parent who wants to watch something with your kid this is a good choice because it's fairly entertaining, but I wouldn't recommend it to adults without kids. But it's darn cute.
7 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
The best family film of the summer, 30 July 2002
Author: Christopher Smith
The first STUART LITTLE wasn't a great movie and STUART LITTLE 2 isn't a great movie, but both are fun and entertaining movies that the whole family can enjoy. The characters are charming, the special effects are amazing, there are plenty of laughs, and the voice work is terrific. I think the PG rating on the film isn't really deserved since there wasn't anything that I think would offend anybody. It should have been rated G. Even though the year is only half over, I think at the end of the year, this will still be the best family film of 2002!
5 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Too bad, 22 December 2005
Author: Lady Targaryen from Brazil
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I know that ''Stuart Little '' is a movie specially Destined for kids, but it is so boring, that I don't know how even kids can handle it, and also how Geena Davis( who is a great actress) had the courage to work in a piece of junk like this. The only funny thing in this movie is Snowbell, the white cat of the Little's family. And that's it. The most annoying thing is the plot: How can a family adopt a mouse and think this is the most normal thing in the world, thinking of him as a son and a brother to his kid? And even more absurd is the idea of Stuart Little going to a human School,having classes and playing soccer with humans. I like family movies, but this one is too awful to be true.
2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
good family flick, 2 August 2002
Author: ellwa2001 from washington state, usa
While I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, I hold with the minority opinion
it isn't up to the standards of the original. The first movie succeeded in
being sweet and charming without being the least bit sugary. Alas, the
sequel doesn't entirely avoid this pitfall (that "little high, little low"
business is just a little gagging). Also, the plot is too predictable,
although that probably won't matter much to children, who are, after all,
the film's target audience.
These are really minor quibbles, though. "Stuart 2" is a fine movie, both for kids and adults. The special effects are well-done, all the actors do a good job in their roles, and the dialogue has some real gems. Particularly noteworthy is Snowbell, the cat (voiced to hilarious perfection by Nathan Lane). He gets all the best lines, and steals every scene he's in--he even upstages Stuart himself! Verdict: Good movie. Go see.
3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
I do not exaggerate in giving this my highest rating. I enjoyed it *that* much., 8 May 2010
Author: TheUnknown837-1 from United States
As of present (May 2010), I have never read the E.B. White classic
"Stuart Little," however I have had the delightful privilege to see the
two films based loosely upon its content. The first "Stuart Little,"
released in 1999, was a very sweet and charming little family picture
that I enjoyed immensely as a kid and still do to this day. I remember
I also enjoyed the sequel, "Stuart Little 2" when I was younger, but
now having re-watched the film for the first time in a long time, I
discover that a rare instance has occurred: I enjoy the movie more now
as an adult than I did when I was eleven. Perhaps it's because I now
understand the adult humor and Snowbell's hilarious lines better, but
overall, "Stuart Little 2" is a very good picture.
In the sequel, Stuart Little (voiced by Michael J. Fox) now has a quintessential relationship to his family. His human brother George has accepted him as a sibling and the cat Snowbell is now his pal instead of his enemy. However, poor Stuart feels a little left-out in the world because of his small size and his lack of real friends. That is until a little bird named Margolo (voiced by Melanie Griffith) literally drops into his life (from the sky), pursued by a vicious falcon. When they are clear of the evil bird's talons, Stuart and Margolo develop a very strong, very heart-warming friendship while teaching to the younger audience members very important lessons about life and friendship.
Those messages were communicated to be very well when I was younger and they still are today. I'm not exactly sure why I like "Stuart Little 2" more as an adult than I did as a kid, but maybe it's because I can understand the full extent of it. The filmmakers made the right choice to film it as a family picture, incorporating elements that children can understand but leaving in great moments of comedy to keep the adults interested. More so than in the first one, the picture is kept upbeat by the hilarious presence of Snowbell the cat, voiced by Nathan Lane, who has one terrific one-liner after another. A favorite moment of mine is when Snowbell is serving as a tool so Stuart can speak into a payphone. Their time runs out and he asks Snowbell for more change. The cat looks at the mouse standing on his head and cackles out: "What do I look like? A fanny pack?" "Stuart Little 2" is a real treat to look at with some gorgeous cinematography and a deliberately over-painted New York City with everybody in the movie wearing extravagant outfits. The special effects used for Stuart, Margolo, Snowbell, the falcon, and the other animated characters in the film is very good, best exemplified by the eyes of Stuart and Margolo. Their eyes are solid black with no visible pupils, but the animators carefully manipulate the characters' expressions to mirror every emotion that could be asked for from a real-life performer.
Perhaps the best element of "Stuart Little 2" is the change of point-of-view from the first one. In the original film, most of the plot involved the Littles' difficulties in adopting a talking mouse as a child and a great portion of the film was people looking down upon little Stuart. Here, the story takes place on Stuart's level, from his point-of-view, and we come to associate and identify more with him this time around. I also really like Hugh Laurie, Geena Davis, and Jonathan Lipnicki as Stuart's adoptive family, who do a really good job at maintaining the illusion that they are communicating to a two-inch mouse adopted as their son and treating him with loving affection.
But the best scenes are the scenes of Margolo and Stuart, particularly a little scene where they are on a date at a makeshift drive-in movie theater: sitting in Stuart's model car in front of a television, watching Alfred Hitchcock's marvelous 1958 film "Vertigo" which we later learn is a poignant choice as there are some parallels in the relationship between Stuart and his avian companion.
"Stuart Little 2" is a wonderful family film. Some may question my judgment and wonder if I exaggerate just a little in shelling out my highest rating for this film. You may ask: maybe it's good, but is it *that* good? Well, maybe not on some critical scales. But the way I review movies, dissecting and analyzing but more or less reporting how I personally responded, than no, not in the least. I enjoyed "Stuart Little 2" so much, every little second of it was a gem for me, and I more than enthusiastically award it ten stars.
3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
A nice sequel, 30 May 2004
Author: rbverhoef (firstname.lastname@example.org) from The Hague, Netherlands
'Stuart Little 2' is a nice and sweet sequel with the same charms as the
first movie. The mouse Stuart (voice by Michael J. Fox) has an adventure in
the big city together with the house cat Snowbell (voice by Nathan Lane)
because the bird he loves (voice by Melanie Griffiths) is taken by Falcon
(James Woods). Of course the family Little (with Geena Davis, Hugh Laurie
and son George played by Jonathan Lipnicki) is looking for
A movie like this is allowed to be predictable. You know it will end happy and that is the way it should end. A movie like this needs some charming, sweet and funny moments and 'Stuart Little 2' has those moments. Every moment between Margalo the bird and Stuart is sweet and charming and especially the moments with the real characters are sometimes very funny. Another nice thing is the creation of the mouse and bird itself. Since Stuart or Margalo is in almost every scene in the movie there is always something nice to look at. This is a perfect movie for the whole family.
3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
A wonderful movie with amazing technology...great for the entire family!, 22 July 2002
Author: jessie-39 from United States
We liked the first one so much that we went to see this one without our grandkids. It was spectacular. The technology is amazing, the story is cute, Nathan Lane is just the funniest and best as is Michael J Fox, Geena Davis and James Woods. A can't miss great summer movie, even better than the first one. Kudos to the people who put this together!
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Spectacular digital animation and a nice story., 8 February 2003
Author: pksky1 from Northern California
I have a personal affection for this film because it's the first one I've
seen with modern digital animation featuring birds. Birds are tough to do
in animation and they are done exceptionally well in this particular kids
The story is the usual Stuart Little for those who might remember the stories from childhood. Kids will like it and adult viewers who lack the excuse of taking the kids will not suffer too much for it. In this story, Stuart Little finds himself a little lonely until a female canary falls out of the sky into his company complaining of an injured wing and a pursuing hawk. Stuart is smitten, of course, but it turns out the canary's past has some unfortunate complications.
The cast is just fantastic. Nathan Hale shows up as the white Angora cat -- again -- reprising his role in "Cats and Dogs". There is also some excellent musical pieces that anyone should enjoy. Best of all the animation is very nearly perfect. The colors seem a little intense, but this is in character with the style of the book which is a very poised fantasy.
|Page 1 of 7:||      |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||Newsgroup reviews||External reviews|
|Parents Guide||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|