IMDb > The Pink Panther 2 (2009) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
The Pink Panther 2
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
The Pink Panther 2 More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 4 of 12: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]
Index 112 reviews in total 

A sequel that lacks creativity

Author: musapuff
8 June 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I watched the Pink Panther I back in junior high and left a 7-8 years gap before watching the sequel. So perhaps I'm too old and outgrew this humor but this movie is not funny at all.

They reused the "hamburger" gag, which lost its funny touch and freshness. Then they tried to make a new hamburger gag with the politically correct teacher, which was not funny either. This movie is just a recycled version of the first one where they included all parts that worked back into the first one. The acting made the characters stupider, more ridiculous, and obnoxious than the first movie. The story and acting felt a bit out of place. I had a really hard time enjoying this.

And can I just say the whole romance story between Inspector Clouseau and Nicole was very awkward to watch. In conclusion, this movie is unoriginal and super predictable.

Was the above review useful to you?

Missing a Lot of the First Movie's Magic, but still Works out,

7/10
Author: Dillon Harris from Ireland
19 July 2015

The Pink Panther 2 is a good movie with a well developed storyline and a fantastic comedic cast. It may not be the same delightful ride the first movie was, but it still brings in plenty of entertainment, laughs and some superb comedic performances, Steve Martin is still in great form as Inspector Clouseau, a portrayal I will always find immensely underrated, he brings in a lot of the same slapstick and cringe humour that we've come to expect from the character, he still seems like he's having a great time and that is the main thing that holds the movie together. In comparison to the first movie, it felt like it was trying harder with comedy, the slapstick humour felt more forced this time around, it wasn't executed as well, just getting straight to the point, but this takes away from the chaos and suspense that is suppose to be delivered with these moments. I also felt the story was a bit more complicated than it really needed to be, it should really have only focused on the Pink Panther diamond and not other artifacts, and I think it should have only took place mainly in France like the first movie did, instead of jumping around to different countries, which got a little bit out of hand after a while and felt unnecessary. Though it may not be everything you would want in a sequel, Pink Panther 2 still delivers with big laughs and a great cast, I would recommend it to anyone looking for a good comedy.

Clouseau must team up with a group of top class detectives to catch the Tornado, a man who has been stealing priceless artifacts from across the globe.

Best Performance: Steve Martin Worst Performance: Lily Tomlin

Was the above review useful to you?

Better than I thought it would be.

8/10
Author: carbuff
10 May 2015

Very good, but not quite great.

Nicely filmed in Europe with quite a few funny jokes and gags, but not really brilliant comedy. Even allowing for that, and I know that this is heresy, I'm starting to think that I enjoyed this film as much as the original Peter Seller's "Pink Panther" productions. Just so you know though, I also like Kraft American Cheese slices, so I might not be the best final arbitrator on taste.

However, I can say with confidence that there was no bad acting or actors, lovely scenery, a bit of heartfelt sentiment, and nothing excessively crude, gory or violent, while still being mature enough to hold the attention of adults, meaning you can kill 92 minutes here without regret.

Was the above review useful to you?

Modern-day Clouseau is a genius.

4/10
Author: fedor8 from Serbia
18 January 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Bumbling like a clown – while solving a case – doesn't make you Clouseau; it makes you an idiot savant. Why on Earth these nincompoops from 21st-century Hollywood studios would want to transform Clouseau from a dim-witted loser to a detective genius is beyond me. Perhaps their writers are too lazy of incompetent to conceive a plot that allows Clouseau to be clumsy AND solve a murder mystery by accident as he always does.

The film has the same formula as the 2006 movie; it goes into brief sentimentality after the first hour and then Clouseau inexplicably solves the case yet again on his own, thereby rendering him a genius, not a buffoon. So what's supposed to be so funny in a genius solving a case?

The director holds some blame as well. He is clueless about how to do comedy. Even with a top cast he doesn't get good scenes often, partly because he keeps cutting away to other actors' faces after every dumb thing Clouseau says or does – as if by watching their "perplexed" faces (but more bored-looking than confused) the gags will gain in weight. Their faces are often inexpressive, which, if anything, hurts the comedic momentum – when there is any to begin with. Clearly, the actors didn't get much guidance from a director who doesn't know anything about actors. Either that, or he just went through the motions, not particularly concerned about how this movie would end up looking once it's edited and ready for viewing.

Martin has the right to change the character a bit to suit his own style. After all, he is so different from Sellers, nobody expects him to do a cheesy imitation. However, does that include talking like a gay man? Occasionally, he talks like he's gay. I'm not even sure he's aware that he doing that. Perhaps that's how he perceives a stereotypical, exaggerated Frenchman i.e. all affected and limp-wristed.

Was the above review useful to you?

You are in my band, we're Dynamic Calories

4/10
Author: jessegehrig from United States
7 January 2015

Yes, I was drunk when I saw this movie, and I enjoyed the experience. That doesn't say much about me as a person and it equally doesn't say much for this movie. So while I found enough of the jokes to be funny thus enjoying the movie, I was also having cognitive difficulty on account of 100 proof rye whiskey. They list the alcohol content on a bottle for good reason- alcohol is a deadly poison, it can kill you. Weed is not going to kill anybody, weed is a saint, but booze, oh brother let me tell you, booze kills. To my credit I was not high on glue or paint, which is something I think anyone should be proud of. We will each of us die inside of our bodies, that's how it ends.

Was the above review useful to you?

What's the point?

1/10
Author: Seth Landers from California, United States
1 October 2014

The first one was plenty and with a sequel, you would expect Steve Martin to try harder this time around. At least with "Pink Panther 1", I had quite a few laughs. Here, there was nothing funny during this movie. The experience I had in the theater was the same as when I saw "The Love Guru", sitting there amazed and stone-faced without a single laugh. Steve Martin can act really well and he can be extremely funny. All Of Me, Roxanne, Parenthood, The Man with Two Brains, etc. are all proof that this man can do better than this and The Pink Panther 2 ruins his charm. The plot...what plot? There was none! Nothing happening, sophomoric jokes, and frankly it was boring! This franchise is beyond dead and there's no excuse for Martin's actions, receiving a 12% on Rotten Tomatoes. Not to mention that this was a serious financial flop! It was just a chance for Martin to cash in on the movie as Peter Sellers rolls in his grave. It's pointless and I wasted my time with this garbage. Do the same and don't waste your time or money on this disaster of a movie!

Was the above review useful to you?

The Circus Clown Returns

1/10
Author: feagruth from UK
14 August 2013

I have always struggled and even wanted to like Steve Martin as a comedy actor yet at best can only rate him as moderately talented. There is something instantly likable about him which has always allowed one to overlook the fact that in any role, it is Steve Martin, stand-up comedian and not the character that one sees.

In taking on the part of Clouseau, Martin and the creators of these hideous films missed the point that trying to imitate a parody will never work. What Edwards and Sellars created played on so many levels including a very ignorant British attitude to French culture that is certainly unknown in America. I suppose at least he can feel happy that he is on a par with Queen Latifa in the Americanisation of the classic Besson film, Taxi.

To go further and make a second installment of such spuriousness just underlines that Martin has no understanding of the fact that all of the original films will stand the test of time and be purchased by generations to come. Great comedians often tend to be great character actors (Take Billy Connoly for one). Moderate comedians make moderate actors.

All in all, it manages to achieve the heights of a nice little retirement fund for the likes of Martin, Cleese (who should be ashamed) and other actors that have sullied their reputations by appearing in this debacle.

Watch the originals, compare them to these. Then you'll really laugh.

Was the above review useful to you?

I always wonder why, when humans hurt themselves for money

1/10
Author: Arnror_II from Norway
6 March 2013

Whyyyyyy!

I know that you are funny Steve, and I know that you know what's funny. Having made one of these abominations before, I really thought you would have the good sense to stay clear of any more attempts of making this into something funny. You, Swart, Reno, and whoever wrote this thing, are not a good combination. You should absolve from any future projects together.

At some point in making a movie you will get a feeling of it's quality I would think, and in this instance you should have pulled the plug, counted your losses, and kept your honor.

Selling honor for money, when you have money, doesn't make sense sir.

Was the above review useful to you?

I have a contrary opinion to the masses here, but what's new?

6/10
Author: WakenPayne from Valhalla
5 February 2013

This movie and it's predecessors are all I would expect from a premise like "moronic police man tries to find national treasured pink diamond while in the meantime gets into situations that involve slapstick." Whilst that isn't a good plot by any stretch of the imagination, it can be mindless, stupid fun.

I have already explained the plot above, which might seem a little bit of the "same old same old" this one is different in the sense that Cluesau is asked to join a team, this team consists of the considered "best detectives in the world".

This is simply my opinion, but if my opinion matters to you (which it shouldn't) then this might be worth a try if you want an hour and a half of just sheer slapstick stupidity.

Was the above review useful to you?

A new low that would have Sellers and Edwards spinning.

4/10
Author: GeorgeSickler from San Miguel de Allende, Gto., Mexico
12 December 2012

I'm sorry, folks, but this movie, as well as the first, is a disaster from bad script, acting and direction.

If I had never seen the original series with Peter Sellers under Blake Edward's direction, I'd feel the same way. I only watched because I thought it would be worth it, but it isn't. I never finished either one.

Martin comes off from being billed by his superiors (except Dryfess, of course) as the "worlds greatest police inspector." But just about everything he does is stupid, inept, dumb, idiotic, and above all, not even funny because it's so obviously bad and he caused it himself.

At lest in the Sellers/Edwards series, the writing and plots were great. Funny things and situations happened to the Inspector, who muddled through them with laughs from the audience. His logic and reasoning were off a lot, which was funny. But he never came off as a clown. He didn't create these situations himself, he just had to deal with them in a funny and entertaining way.

It's saddening to me that Steve Martin actually went along to do a second film. He must have needed some extra cash to make a boat payment or something.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 4 of 12: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history