Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore (2010) User Reviews

Go to the movies and bring your kids to see this movie and run as hell to see Inception!!!

[Loving_Silence · 4/10 · 30 July 2010]

The children will really like this film, but the adults won't. So I advice you to go to the movie theaters as a family and your 4-12 years old go watch this film and you and our spouse or partner watch a more grown up film like Inception or if you have already seen Inception, then go watch Salt. However this isn't the worst film ever, or the worst film of Summer 2010, there are actually some funny and enjoyable moments in this film, however there aren't many of them at all. If it was consistently funny, I'd recommend it to the whole family or anyone looking for a good time.

This film is actually better than Marmaduke, but its still very dull and really not funny. It won't be a horrible experience watching this film, but it will be boring.

4/10

Good enough for me

[callhoajede · 5/10 · 28 October 2010]

Its my first movie review. I just had to review this movie because i have read some harsh reviews about this hilarious movie. I think this movie is good enough to be watched by the whole family.

Its funny as hell, i like the introduction of twinkles, using the psychology Hannibal Lecter uses to pick peoples buttons, and also the introduction of the pigeon. the casting was also good, i think the actors were good enough for their roles.

If you don't think spy next door is bad, then you would love this movie. its like an everyday spy movie (like spy kids) aimed at kids.

It has its villain and the side kick.

I really don't think this film was made to win any awards, but i think its a befitting sequel for the first one. just watch it with you family and enjoy.

Decent enough family viewing on a wet weekend.

[Troy_Campbell · 5/10 · 2 October 2010]

This belated sequel to the 2001 box-office hit Cats & Dogs is better than I expected. That's not to say it's great, it's not, but there have been far inferior kiddie films I've sat through this year with my four year old (not naming any names... Alvin and Shrek). There's free-flowing action that will entertain the younglings and the animals themselves are cute and/or funny enough to please all audience members, though the plot has more than its fair share of eye-rolling moments and the CGI is poorer than it should be considering the movie's $85m budget.

The gags are hit or miss, however the few that stick are quite amusing. A riff on Silence of the Lambs is hilarious and provides the sole laugh-out-loud scene whilst the Head of M.E.O.W (the feline secret service agency) Tab Lazenby – cheekily voiced by Roger Moore – offers plenty of 007 parodied humour. Elsewhere the talented voice cast do their best to inject energy into the frequently lack-lustre and cheesy script. Marsden is likable as lead mutt Diggs, Nolte is gruff as ever as Alec Baldwin's replacement for the hardened Butch, Applegate brings the sass as Catherine and Midler is clearly having a blast as the malevolent Kitty. Chris O'Donnell fares a lot worse as live-action character Shane, Diggs' loving ex-cop partner, his unabashed mugging an absolute low in his career.

Decent enough viewing with the nippers on a wet weekend.

2.5 out of 5 (1 - Rubbish, 2 - Ordinary, 3 - Good, 4 - Excellent, 5 - Classic)

Forgettable parody of action movies

[geoffrey-landis · 2/10 · 14 August 2010]

Mary wanted to see it-- her rule is, if it's got a cat in it, she wants to see it. Quick summary: the trailer shows all the good scenes. The first movie had been mildly cute, although forgettable. The highlight of sequel should have been "more really cute dogs and cats." But they decided to put an average (full grown) German Shepherd in the lead (instead of the cute puppy from the first movie), and focused too much on the pigeon (who, admittedly, did get most of the good lines). The supporting cat was good, but had too little screen time. Most of the plot was quotes from other movies, with cats and dogs playing the parts (in particular, the opening title scene was a very well done version of the old James Bond movie title sequences). Except for where it was a direct parody of other movies, the plot was mostly perfunctory, and the denouement was a long and mostly incomprehensible action scene. The 3- D was both irrelevant, and also badly done. See it in 2D. If you see it, do stick through the credits for the final scene.

Not worth the money

[d-j-weinberg · 3/10 · 2 August 2010]

My family and I really liked the first one so we were excited to see this when the previews came out. It was no where close to being as entertaining as the first. We just saw it again on TV the other night so it wasn't like we were living in the past. This sequel just wasn't good or funny. There was a guy sitting near us that laughed his pants off at the previews before the movie and I didn't hear him once during the feature (and he would have laughed at someone farting)! And as other previewers mentioned, the 3D brought nothing to the table. So, don't waste you money, wait to rent it. There were a few good scenes but the key word is "few". Im not the type to go to a kids movie and expect something other than a kids movie, but....Marmaduke should win an Acadamy Award next to this one (Marmaduke was actually very good and worth seeing).

Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore (2010, G)

[Rizar · 2 November 2010]

Well, the official website for "Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore" has a paw for a mouse pointer, the movie uses most every lazy pun possible about pets, and a reviewer has already claimed the movie marks the end of civilization as we know it. With such prospects, a film about talking cats and dogs coming together to fight off Kitty Galore (voiced by Bette Midler) doesn't eye well for adults. And it doesn't. Any mathematicians in the theater can better spend their time tracking the noticeable upward curve of boredom and silliness the longer the movie runs (the pet gags during the end credits don't count).

Aren't kids movies like this supposed to be funny despite their absurdity? It took 9 years to bring this sequel of "Cats & Dogs" to the theaters, which gave it plenty of time to spread a wide umbrella for big name voices. Nick Nolte's deep scratchy voice took to the end credits to figure out, but it stands out in his role as a scrappy mentor dog, Butch, the muscle of a secret agency run by semi-intelligent talking dogs.

We learn that dogs have an underground spy organization where no human has ever entered, appropriately outfitted with hi-tech gadgets in the Bond tradition and specially tailored for dog clichés. Cats have a similar underground facility for their secret organization, named MEOWS. The first pet puns are quirky and tone setting, but after the third or fourth - and when combined with lame cultural references (including Hannibal Lecter and who knows what else) - it becomes torture.

The main character is a German shepherd police dog named Diggs (James Marsden), who joins a band of unlikely heroes to try to protect humans against Kitty Galore. Diggs follows the 'Dirty Harry' template of the ends justifies his means, that is, he causes havoc while taking down a madman and tends to set off fiery explosions in the process. So, of course, he's recruited by Butch (Nick Nolte) to join the secret dog organization. Diggs and Butch reluctantly join teams with a top kitty agent, Catherine (Christina Applegate), from MEOWs. Along for the ride is a pea brained pigeon, Seamus (Katt Williams), to provide comic relief.

The plot is adequately thin and senseless. They battle against Kitty Galore (voiced by Bette Midler), a hairless Sphinx cat, who plans to enslave humans and take over the world. Her plan is to use malevolent sound waves, from a weapon called "The Call of the Wild" (by the way), at an ultra low frequency (just for dogs) to trigger all dogs to violently rebel against humans. Humans will have to lock them all in kennels. But the movie forgets to mention how Kitty Galore intends to conquer humans. Will she change the frequencies and use the weapon on us? She doesn't specify, but perhaps she could change to an appropriate frequency to trigger our caveman impulses, or something.

Kitty Galore is funny as she reluctantly placates her not so magical magician owner. She became evil because her previous owners treated her like a freak and threw her out after she fell into a vat of hair removal cream (like the Joker from "Batman"). The movie has a couple other funny moments with a house filled of too-lazy-to-move high cats, and a goofy Calico cat voiced by Wallace Shawn (lampooning his role in "The Princess Bride"). Other stars take part in hopes of success, including Neil Patrick Harris, Roger Moore, and Joe Pantoliano, but it doesn't help much.

Some of the most effective scenes are ones where pets give normal pet reactions. The audience actually responded to Diggs whimpering as he was locked in his cage by his former cop partner, played by Chris O'Donnell (in one of the few human roles). The pets only pretend to act normal around humans, but on occasion a little girl stumbles on them talking. She's amazed, no one believes her, and the pets resort to clichés (butt sniffing for dogs).

That's it. Most of the other jokes are dull. The movie becomes so lazy, any action is just meaningless and boring. The movie uses a mix of live action animals, puppetry, and computer animation to bring the pets to life. The CGI mouths attempt to make such absurdity seem real, but who cares when what they say isn't funny or interesting. The 3D wasn't very noticeable at all.

For the under 10 set only, all others will be bored.

[BigWhiskers · 1/10 · 2 August 2010]

I've seen the original and those who think this is an improvement are on something. While the original was cute and did manage to entertain ,this sequel does not. They try and cram as much CGI and silly dialog as possible in this movie including a rather useless magician character and a pigeon that I wanted to skewer just to shut it up. I barely heard even a laugh or giggle in the audience except for the few under 10 set kids and even they looked bored after-wards.

The plot involving a neglected cat aka Kitty Galore is so silly and ridiculous even by kiddie standards. The cat who was a member of some spy group of cats called MEOWS(the counterpart to the dogs spy group that protects humans)she turns rogue and decides to take it out on humans since she was neglected by her human owners after she lost her fur in an accident while being chased by a guard dog.So she collects computer parts and starts making a device to turn dogs into rabid animals which will force humans to put them in cages and then she and her cat minions will enslave mankind. It's even insulting to kids to sit through this drivel. Some of the dialog even tries to cater to older kids/adults but it fails miserably. Bette Midler tries her best to ham it up as Kitty Galore but her voice-over is nothing more than overacted camp that's painfully unfunny.

I think this movie should have been a direct to DVD release-it didn't deserve the big screen treatment. It still amazes me how much money is spent on movies such as these when other movies that are way better and have a small budget get the direct to TV or DVD treatment.

Bomb 1/10

Minimal Credit for TRYING To Put Stuff in for Adults

[RichardSRussell-1 · 4/10 · 31 July 2010]

Cats & Dogs [2]: The Revenge of Kitty Galore (1:22, PG-13, 3-D) — other: talking animals; 3rd string; sequel

I created the "talking animals" subcategory after years of frustration trying to figure out whether to slot things like this under SF, fantasy, or elsewhere. Now no agonizing is required: Anything that involves chatty critters (or cars, babies, vegetables, toys, or other entities that aren't actually capable of speech) just gets dumped here.

There's a general sense that these things tend to be kiddie fare with low production values and even lower IQ expectations. But a review of the 74 such movies since 2000 shows that they aren't much different than SF&F movies in general, coming in with an average rating of 4.92 on my scale of 1-9 (compared to a 4.93 average for the other 474 movies in my database). Some of them have been superb (Bolt, Toy Story 2, Up), and others very good (Charlotte's Web, Finding Nemo, The Golden Compass, a couple of Ice Age movies, Monsters Inc., Ratatouille, Toy Story 3, and Wallace and Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit).

At the other end of the scale are the movies that give rise to the stereotype: Garfield, Scooby Doo, Space Chimps, Alvin and the Chipmunks, Beverly Hills Chihuahua, VeggieTales, Marmaduke, Rugrats, Furry Vengeance, and 2 wretched excrescences called Yu-Gi-Oh and Tamala 2010.

The original Cats & Dogs (2001) was dead average with a 5 rating. It certainly was not the kind of artistic triumph or blockbuster hit that demanded a sequel, but we got one anyway, this one in (all together now: ooooooo) 3-D, as if that alone justifies its existence. Is it a dog or the cat's meow? (Puns intended; please don't hurt me.)

Well, in the tradition of such things, there are bones thrown (ouch) to the adults, including a lot of smirky allusions to the James Bond oeuvre. 007 fans will recognize that "Kitty Galore" is a pun on Bond girl Pussy Galore (itself a smirking pun on something that will never sneak into a PG movie). There are silhouettes and sultry female vocals under the opening credits. And Bond actor (1973-1985) Roger Moore does one of the voices, for "Tab Lazenby", head of Mousers Enforcing Our World's Safety (MEOWS), reminding old farts like me that the immediate successor to Sean Connery was not Moore but the hapless George Lazenby, about whom nothing has been heard since 1969.

Nor do they stop there. I have to give Writers Ron Friedman and Steve Bencich and Director Brad Peyton credit for working really hard at throwing in a lot of code words, images, and background business designed to appeal to adults. Much of it was pretty clever, including allusions to movies made well before the target audience for this film was even born. But the result is schizophrenic. It's like going to see the Jerry Lewis version of Hamlet and discovering Laurence Olivier and John Gielgud playing Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.

In the final analysis, tho, do we go to see a movie just for the puns?*

No, we don't, and regrettably the ostensible surface plot of the movie, tho crammed with substance, snappy dialog, and a certain cockeyed coherence, is pretty insipid. Once again, dogs and cats are portrayed as mortal enemies enslaved to their basic natures, except that this time they're required to *gasp* work together to foil the evil machinations of criminal mastermind Kitty Galore, who intends to broadcast a worldwide dog-whistle tone (from a CD helpfully Sharpied with the legend "The Call of the Wild") that will turn her canine nemeses into snarling menaces, thus bringing their doom upon them as an alarmed humanity wipes them all out. There are more twists and turns as well (as I said, no lack of filling), but it's all pretty much of the same caliber.

The voice cast features many B-list names for no discernible reason and to no audible benefit (except for Bette Midler as Kitty), and the visual cast is a bunch of animals trained to assume unnatural positions and have matchmove artists do strange CGI things with their jaws. This is only fitfully effective.

I saw the film in 3-D. The good news is that the main feature was preceded by "Coyote Falls", a 3-minute roadrunner cartoon in a passable imitation of the grand cel-animation tradition, and it used 3-D to marvelous advantage with Wile E.'s latest Acme acquisition, a bungee cord. The bad news is that the 3-D imaging in the movie itself was sloppy, with numerous cases of dogs having doubled snouts, or a patch of fur seeming to float above the surface of the cat it was nominally attached to. This is a movie that didn't care enuf to send the very best.

I do appreciate the attempt to give the adults something to care about, tho, and it was accomplished without having to distract the kids from the story they came to see, so the overall effect is to get a gentleman's D+ from me.

––––––

*Besides, for SF&F fans, they're not even nerd puns.

Nothing new....

[crimetex · 2/10 · 12 November 2010]

Dogs as guardians of mankind are back, and I was looking forward to seeing this movie long time before they announced it. Too bad they tried to use some clichés and jokes from other spy movies giving them this "pet way of talking", as in other animated movies, they add a funny character -remember Leo Getz in Lethal Weapon?- which wasn't totally necessary, but makes the movie bearable.

I don't know if it's some bad acting by some of the actors, and a story that was too predictable -I know it's a children movie, but surprise is always good, and if we look back into the first movie, nobody would've expected Mr. Tinkles to take over his owner's company, and then leaving his sidekick behind, talk about twist of a bolt-. For a second there, I also think there was too much CGI, I know it's inevitable in films nowadays, but when it's so easy to distinguish shots, geeze, it's like watching a cartoon movie.

Now, Diggs, always blowing up the operation, is an exhausting resource here, it reminds me of Eddie Murphy in I spy... it's simply too stupid to be funny... I really think the team of writers followed the formula without even trying to bring something new to the film.

Watch it if you're extremely bored and the only thing on TV is American Idol.

It really wasn't that bad.

[xbladex-792-23244 · 6/10 · 3 October 2010]

I am 19 and I loved the original when I was younger, and I wanted to check this one out as I thought it would bring back memories, and it did. After seeing such a low score, I didn't expect it to be that great, but I found myself enjoying the film after a very short time.

The movie was actually pretty funny, and I don't normally find kids movies very funny, but this was actually good as a sequel. No, it wasn't amazing or even great, but it definitely wasn't bad and didn't deserve such a low rating. I've seen much worse kids movies get higher ratings than this.

You need to approach it with an open mind and remember that it is a kids movie and you will enjoy this, especially if you love animals or have a younger friend who loves animals to watch it with.

I have been waiting for years for a sequel to the original, and while this one wasn't as great as I remember the original being, it was still an enjoyable movie with many laughs, and familiar characters.

The special effects were definitely not the best I've seen, but there isn't anything wrong with that, the movie wasn't trying to be mind blowing, but the effects got the job done. Its a good sequel full of laughs and fun for the family to enjoy.

If you can approach this movie with an open mind, and remember its not an adult's film, but fun for the family, you will find plenty of enjoyment and laughs for everyone in the family.

No where near as good as the original!

[thekyles99 · 3/10 · 12 August 2010]

No where near the laughs the first instalment delivered. the only good thing about this sequel is that they brought back Sean Hayes character "Tinkles" SPOILER FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT CARE Don't READ FURTHER.. Yep and looks like there is going to be a third instalment folks you all have seen how silence of the lambs ended well. meet Mr. tinkles who just might have a friend for dinner. In this instalment James Marsden provides the vocals for the main character, a German Sheppard police dog who is washed up named Diggs. Digg's partner (Chris Odonnell) cannot keep covering up Digg's blunders so until he can figure how to get his shield back Digg's must remain in the city pound. Butch, yes one of the returning heroes from Cats And Dogs 1 but voiced this time by Nick Nolte (guess Alec Baldwin wanted nothing to do with the sequel) gets advised by returning hero #2 Lou (also voiced by another actor) that he wants Diggs to join up with them to fight the new feline threat to canine and human kind Kitty Galore (voiced by Bette Midler). this time around the villain has come across a sound so severe that when dogs here it they will go crazy and attack their owners, therefore removing all dogs as pets due to safety concerns. As to which if this dastardly plan succeeds next up on the chopping block will be the humans. Cats and dogs this time around have to join forces to remove the world of Kitty Galore the feline threat. My kids loved this as much as the first instalment however i did not..but then again these movies were made for the kids i guess.....

Cats & Dogs

[NinjaGirl132905 · 10/10 · 8 August 2010]

I cannot believe that this movie has such a low rating. It is a kid's movie people! You have to take it for what it is, it's not meant to be a mind provoking film! I thought it was pretty funny and I enjoyed it. It's much better then the other movies for kid's that have been released lately. The movie was excellent and I especially thought Mr. Tinkle's performance definitely stole the show once he was on screen. There were many scenes throughout the film that had me laughing so hard I cried. If you do not like kid's movies then don't see this- plain and simple! But if you are like me and you want to see it just for the cute comedy then see it. Personally I thought it was funnier then a lot of comedies for adults.

Nothing innovating but still really entertaining and funny!

[kluseba · 6/10 · 23 August 2010]

I went to the cinema to watch this movie because my girlfriend really appreciated the first part which I've never seen and she convinced me to come with her. She bought the DVD of the first movie and there was a special gift card in it which allowed her to have a reduction of ten dollars on a ticket for the sequel and so we went to the cinema.

I didn't expect anything from this movie and I wouldn't usually comment on such a movie because it is simply not my kind of genre, but as I see now such horrible votes and the movie entering in the infamous top one hundred bottom list, I thought I'd be better if I might write my opinion, because this movie isn't simply that bad - and I am generally kind of severe on movies! While watching this movie for one and a half hour, I've never taken a look on my watch, I've never felt bored at all and I found this movie very entertaining. There were also a lot of nice laughs, especially the naive but sympathetic pigeon was worth the watch - and let me tell you that it is rather difficult to make me laugh. Beside the pigeon, the little girl which always saw the animals making crazy things while her mother didn't recognize anything was an entertaining running gag, too. Another funny thing was the scene in the animal's Alcatraz which I thought was a nice idea. The collaboration, the prejudices and the growing team spirit between the secret agencies of the cats and the dogs were also some really nice elements in this movie even if they were predictable. And the movie even had something philosophical: Cats and dogs put away their prejudices to save their beloved humans together and fight a common enemy. Well, I know, this is a predictable content, too, but still very touching and even teaching for young kids who are watching this movie. And the idea of adapting the world of James Bond to the world of cats and dogs isn't silly at all, but very funny for the kids, nicely done for the adults who understand some funny allusions and certainly better than most of the boring super agent comedy movie in the key of Austin Powers and other boring stuff.

A part of that, the movie is well animated and has a perfect length. People who really like cats or especially dogs might even give a few stars more, for example for the funny and cute video clips in the end of the movie.

Of course, this movie is just a sequel, it shows nothing innovating and the story is predictable and of course there are no twists in the movie, but you can't expect that from any animation movie a part of the amazing "Wall-E". Some people here say that you should put the children into the cinema to watch this movie and head yourself for the - in my opinion - heavily overrated "Inception" - I mean, you just can't compare those movies and if you take this point as a judgement, it is certain that you may be disappointed.

So, don't listen to some of those really ordinary and exaggerated hate comments and spend some ninety minutes with your kids or younger sister or girlfriend or cat/dog fetish, switch your brain off and enjoy the nice jokes and this very entertaining movie.

5,5 to 6 stars out of 10!

Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore (2010)

[SnakesOnAnAfricanPlain · 4/10 · 26 December 2011]

I kind of enjoyed this. I liked the original 9 years ago, and this kept the same feel and sense of humor. The human actors are just a distraction to the spy like efforts of the cats and dogs, and there are no characters as funny as some of the cats in the original. The CGI, real animals, and puppetry, comes together most of the time, and it doesn't matter when it looks a bit ridiculous. The brief segments of Sean Hayes proves that he was the driving force of the original, and he should have been a main focus here. Like most childish children's films, there are many annoying characters and a lot of lame jokes, which had me groaning and sighing. Probably a bit too long went by between this and the original. Luckily, it allows new viewers to slip right in.

Woof

[dtucker86 · 3 August 2010]

I'm 42 and this is the second kid oriented film I've seen in less then two weeks, the first was Beezus And Ramona. I guess maybe in a way I'm a kid at heart. I never saw the first Dogs And Cats so I can't compare. I can say that this is a fun, breezy way to spend 82 minutes. I like how this spoofs James Bond movies right down to the opening credits and the name Kitty Galore. Also, Roger Moore does one of the voices and his character is named Tab Lazenby (for you Bond trivia lovers, George Lazenby played 007 in 1969's On Her Majesty's Secret Service). Don't call me weird but I think that there is a good message for children in this film, let me explain. The dogs and cats join forces to stop this rogue cat Kitty Galore. This teaches kids that you should put aside petty things to band together as a team. Oh, they also do a good job of spoofing Silence Of The Lambs. My only real complaint isn't with the animals its with one of the humans in the film, that goofy magician Kitty was working for. He was so annoying.

3

[Edvis-1997 · 3/10 · 30 November 2018]

First part of the movie was quite interesting to watch like 5-6 but this one huh... If directors/producers/creators are out of ideas they shouldn't even try to create film just to try make some cash. This movie doesn't worth your time. Trust me...

Good but not great

[aileencorcoran · 5/10 · 1 January 2013]

I loved the first Cats and Dogs; the action, the CGI, the story. It was great fun and I still laugh at it even now at the age of 18! I did not expect the sequel to be that good, because it is released around 9 years after the original; all the fans are grown up, and the new generation have moved onto different things. I prefer animations (usually!), and because it was a sequel to a childhood favourite, I decided to give it a go, for nostalgic reasons, and for love of dogs! (I like cats, too hahaha :D).

The movie brings back original characters; Lou the beagle (Neil Patrick Harris), Butch the Anatolian Shepherd Dog (Nick Nolte), Shep the Old English Sheepdog (Michael Clark Duncan), Peek the Chinese Crested (can't remember his voice actor), and even a cameo of Mr.Tinkles the Persian cat! (Sean Hayes). Lou, despite the different actor, still sounded somewhat like himself, and even though his character changed A lot, he was still a good supporting character. I was disappointed by his change of character, simply because it disregards his role in the first film almost completely. It does, however, add a certain level of maturity to Lou. Butch's voice actor sounds older that Alec Baldwin, however, this shows his maturity and how the film is clearly set a few years after the first. Diggs (James Mardsen) the German Shepherd/Alsatian, is a great character, and does bring colour and humour to the film, as well as a level of humanity; what I mean is, it shows the dog having problems, which the audience can relate to, much like Butch in the original. Catherine (Christina Applegate) is another great addition, and the chemistry between her and Diggs as characters, no matter how cliché, is believable and humorous. Kitty Galore (a Sphynx Cat) is very well animated, and voiced fantastically by Bette Midler. She is a typical villaness, and is wonderful!

The story, in my opinion, is bland. I understand Kitty's turmoil and want of revenge, but to enslave all mankind? C'mon Kitty, everybody has ups and downs, don't ya think you're overracting a bit? Just my two cents. At least Tinkles wanted to obliterate dog kind (in some sense) so cats will become "Top Dog" again. All cats were besmirched in C&D~#1, in Kitty Galore, why could she not seek revenge on that one dog? Or her family? What do you think?

The action is plentyful, the CGI brilliant. The puppets were kind of stupid, and removed whatever smoothness one can find within the film. The whole cats and dogs working together is a good message for kids, showing you should overlook your differences etc in the face of adversity, to help one other out and build a bond.

The humour, no matter how over done, is funny, especially the cats on 'nip! Some is cringeworthy, though.

Finally; Seamus, the pigeon. I did not like him at all. He, in my opinion, added nothing to the story, even though he was meant to, and he annoyed me for the most part.

Overall, if you are a die hard fan of the original, don't expect too much. The Brady's are never mentioned, and the only reference is the recurring characters. It is, however, a fun and enjoyable film, but mainly for the kiddies due to the humour in question.

5/10.

(my first review!!!)

Bad... just bad.

[jerm1027-1 · 2/10 · 11 August 2010]

I wasn't a huge fan of the first Cats and Dogs movie and I hated this one even more. This is just a series of really bad parodies thrown together, most noticeably based on the James Bond series. You will see and hear a few lines from other classics which are also done poorly. It wasn't that funny, it wasn't engaging, the special effects are behind - I don't think there is any part of this movie that was done right. I only managed to smirk two or three times during the movie, all thanks to Katt Williams, but this wasn't his thing. He is normally a lot funnier. I would much rather watch his stand up than waste money on this movie. I don't think this would be a good kids movie either since it is based on the Bond series. Could you imagine what your kid would do if they found out Kitty Galore is suppose to be Pussy Galore? It would be the perfect excuse for them to yell out "Pussy!" all the time. This movie was a bad idea before the script writer put his pen to his notepad. My recommendation is to give this movie a pass , run as far away from it as you can, and don't ever look back. It isn't even worthy of the bargain bin at a used video shop.

Kids will be bouncing in their seats, plus a nice nap for parents

[Bethsmoviemadness · 3/10 · 1 August 2010]

Probably my shortest review ever. For once, I have very little to say about a movie. Please see my blog for other titles.

I often include my son's views in the reviews that I write on my blog, and we frequently differ in opinion. Even Ricky agreed with me this time. There was no need for this movie to be in 3-D. This is starting to become irksome. Theaters charge more for 3-D movies, which I'm happy to pay, when it is worthwhile.

However, this is probably where my 10-year-old and I depart in our opinion.

Your kids are going to love this movie. Spying and flying dogs, cats and birds, working together to take down one seriously disturbed kitty -- what's not for them to love? Although there was an extended scene that replicated Silence of the Lambs. Needless to say, the kids aren't going to understand that reference, so I'm not at all sure why it was included. Obviously, it was an attempt to bring parents into the movie, but as it was poorly done, it failed miserably.

Parents, what can I say? If it weren't a darkened movie theater, I would say bring a book. Do they still have those Itty Bitty Book Lights? This is not a movie you are going to see with hopes of being entertained. You will see it because your kids are begging for it. If you can get them to go to Despicable Me or The Sorcerer's Apprentice instead, go for it.

Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore is a boring sequel that should have gone straight to video. The voice talents of heavy hitters such as James Marsden, Christina Applegate, Bette Midler, Sean Hayes, Neil Patrick Harris and Nick Nolte wasted.

not 100% bad..

[planktonrules · 3/10 · 8 January 2011]

Had I known that this film would not be 100% horrible, then I probably never would have seen it. Yes, I love a bad movie now and then and last time I checked, it was on IMDb's Bottom 100 list. However, I now noticed that the film has a much higher rating (3.4) and it is no longer on the list. So, it's obviously not a good film, but not bad enough I should have sought it out to fulfill my bad movie addiction.

Unlike a truly bad film, there is an audience for this film. Undemanding children (no older than perhaps 10) would probably laugh at the film and its countless poop and fart jokes, a bald cat, tons of stunts and just the sight of seeing talking pets. All this make for a bad and especially annoying film but you can't blame the kids--after all, most children are not movie reviewers and don't mind all this silliness! But, for anyone older than 10, it will be a chore to watch--and at times pretty painful. It's a shame, as the first film, "Cats & Dogs" was pretty good and had some appeal for all ages--whereas "Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore" would only appeal to someone over age 10 if they have very, very, very low standards...or a traumatic brain injury.

My verdict: dumb and tedious but also fun for young kids. Parents, if you ARE forced to watch it, I suggest watching it along with copious amounts of your favorite HIGH alcohol content beverage.

Great introduction to Bond for kids

[imogen-15 · 7/10 · 20 August 2010]

Took my sons aged 4 & 6 to this & they loved it. It may not be the most entertaining movie ever for adults, but heck, it passed a morning of the school holidays, & that's good enough for me. Being a Bond fan, I loved the opening credits & liked the fact that they were copying that genre. I confess to intermittent feelings of boredom, but have yet to sit through a kid's movie where this was not the case at some point. It is clearly very very difficult to make a film which genuinely entertains adults and children throughout - if they manage to make both laugh at some point, they are doing well in my humble opinion! I asked my kids whether they had preferred Toy Story 3 (which has a much higher rating on IMDb) or Cats & Dogs, and they said they had liked both just the same. Perhaps IMDb should only allow kids to review kids films! Adults, this film may not be Oscar material, but lets keep things in perspective.

Indifferent shenanigans accompanies GREAT Road Runner short

[neil-476 · 5/10 · 4 August 2010]

This live action/CGI feature is a sequel to 2001's Cats And Dogs, a film which I am pretty sure I saw but which I can remember nothing about. Which doesn't bode well, for a start. As far as I can see, there is virtually no continuity from the first film to this one apart from a Labrador called Butch (voiced by Alec Baldwin previously and Nick Nolte here) and a Persian cat called Mr Tinkles, voiced by Sean Hayes in both. The general gist of things is espionage operations conducted by cats and dogs, and the wrinkle here is that they have to work together to foil the dastardly plans of Kitty Galore (one of those ugly cats things with no fur, voiced by Bette Midler).

The voice talent is great - much higher profile than the humans (led by Chris O'Donnell in a thankless role) and the CGI work is excellent - there are times when you know something must be CGI (facial expressions, mouth articulation, certain actions and so on) but it is often the case that you really aren't sure. The script is loaded with gags (even down to Roger Moore playing the leader of the cats' espionage organisation, a cat named Tab Lazenby). And the moral of the thing is laudable - even cats and dogs can learn how to get along together (so, by extension, we should all be able to, shouldn't we?).

But something doesn't quite work. And I think it is that the film has no heart. It seems to be a fairly mechanical exercise in putting elements together which should work, and maybe they do for kids, but they didn't really work for me.

This may also be the reason why I don't remember the first movie.

The 3D doesn't add anything significant, although the 3D Road Runner cartoon attached to the main movie was GREAT. More of this, please - MUCH more! - and less of the Cats And Dogs.

A very cute, but non serious movie.

[elomusic · 9/10 · 19 March 2012]

I'm 57, the wife is 54, no kids or grandkids.

Frankly we thought the movie was really enjoyable, but we tried to see it through the eyes of innocence. There were some parts I actually got a laugh out of, even at my age. I loved the part where it was announced to congratulate a dog on his son, son, daughter, daughter, son, daughter.....just one of those clever parts that you have to pay attention to catch.

I loved the opening credits and Shirley Bassey theme, straight from James Bond and very clever.

Sometimes we need a change from the movies we watch. Movies are so much more than cutting up teenagers in slasher movies, or great American movies like Platoon where a young girl is raped by Americans, or the great Spielberg in his Saving Private Ryan where American soldiers shoot German soldiers who are trying to surrender. No, there wasn't any 'f' bombs, nobody was in a nude scene, nobody was decapitated, nobody cheated on their spouses. You know the types of movies adults enjoy.

Yes, there are times I wish to watch a racy movie or a war movie, however this was not one of those times. The wife and I desired a cute movie that anybody of any age could watch, and this movie was one of those.

Real quickly, I fell asleep during the original Cats and Dogs, but this movie hooked me from the first and wouldn't let me off the hook. The original lost me in the first 10 minutes.

Fun formula Children's Movie

[Rabh17 · 7/10 · 26 November 2010]

I repeat: This is a CHILDREN'S MOVIE!!

There's a lot of up and down votes on something that really wasn't meant for critically snarky 30-somethings. Get a grip!

The First Movie was interesting because the concept of our pets being part of shadow spy organizations that stayed out of human sight was an eye-opener. Following up on the initial break-out is always an up-hill slog.

This one was Okay. Crazed Cat Villain attempts to take over the world by making all dogs go crazy so humans will put them all into kennels. Both Canine and Feline Organizations get together to prevent disaster. what follows is EASY and ENTERTAINING to a Child. . .

Repeat: 'Entertaining to a Child', not someone's Little Genius who reads the New York Times for Bedtime Stories!

The references and gags put in for the accompanying adults are there to LIGHTLY ENTERTAIN us by eliciting Pun-Groans or soft snickers. They ARE NOT trying to give you a Comedy Central Sidetrack. The Adult is NOT the Target Audience here. If they did that, IT WOULD NOT BE A KID MOVIE ANYMORE!

Personally, I groaned at the Batman/Joker redux of Kitty Galore. Then I smiled at the Dangerous Kitty doing the Silence of the Lambs sendup.

And the rest of the time, I just sat back and enjoyed a rambunctious, Tom & Jerry style action romp simply because I wanted to be entertained by something lighthearted.

And the Pigeon was a Hoot!

Simply put: A good clean Movie for Little Kids that won't put the adult to sleep. Or even if you don't have Kids, and you want something light and silly to watch that doesn't require thought, this is an easy choice. Enough said.

Avoid at all costs

[rmillerlaw · 2/10 · 15 October 2010]

I ended up seeing this film twice in the theaters. More on that in a minute.

This film made me realize, after seeing Beverly Hills Chihuaha, and Marmaduke, that "talking animal movies" is a sign of poor poor quality in films. They know that kids, and their parents, will be willing to pay and suffer through almost anything if it has a cute wise-cracking dog or cat character.

This movie sets a new standard for the worst of a genre, however. It really has nothing to do with the first film, and has a number of dated James Bond based gags that just fall flat. Some great talent went into the voices here, but those actors and actresses (I'm talking to you, Bette Midler and William Macy) should be ashamed of themselves.