Having escaped death by the skin of their teeth after the unprecedented meteorological phenomenon in Sharknado (2013), the lucky survivors, Fin, and his former wife, April, find themselves en route to Manhattan, to warn the world about the freakish incident. However, once more, heavy, shark-ridden storm clouds gather in the sky, setting the stage for yet another blood-drenched disaster in the making. This time, the unsuspecting Big Apple is the epicentre of the ferocious tornado, as not one but two violent cyclones are converging into a massive atmospheric anomaly, threatening to level the entire city. Now, veteran Fin has to brave the elements and do what he does best before New York City turns into an endless all-you-can-eat buffet. But, the first Sharknado was already too much to handle. Who can survive a second one?Written by
Opening scenes: The plane cutting through the clouds like a shark through water, and the pilots discussing whether they had the fish or chicken for dinner are a direct nod to Airplane! (1980), with the aforementioned Robert Hays, once again, playing a pilot. See more »
(at around 27 mins) The retired baseball player tells Ray that his father was sitting in a particular section of Citi Field at his final game twenty-five years previously, which would have been 1989. Citi Field did not open until 2009; at the time of the player's last game, the Mets would have been playing in Shea Stadium. See more »
Having survived the Sharknado in Los Angeles, pro-surfer Fin Shepard (Ian Ziering) and his ex-wife April (Tara Reid) fly to New York City to promote their book, How To Survive A Sharknado, where they find the same thing happening all over again, only on an even bigger scale.
I usually prefer my crap movies to be bad by accident, although I do admit to enjoying intentionally crap disaster flick Sharknado just a bit more than I probably should have done. With this sequel, director Anthony C. Ferrante attempts to outdo his first film in terms of sheer silliness, and largely succeeds with some truly ridiculous set-pieces, but with essentially the same plot (full of gaping plot holes, not that that matters one bit), and equally dire CGI effects, I found that the novelty soon wore off, leaving me rather frustrated by the fact that there are now at least two more sequels, and a bloody good chance that I'll make myself watch them.
1 of 1 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this