Review of The Fly II (1989) by Eduardo C — 18 Sep 2007
That Cronenberg's "The Fly", one of the few damn near flawless entries into the genre, got a sequel is bad enough. That the sequel is nothing but an excuse to have people be killed by a fly creature in graphic manner is inevitable, I suppose, but no less disappointing as it follows a film that was anything but.
Eric Stoltz is very good in the role of Brundle's offspring, and brings credibility to a character whose very existence is ridiculous and who could easily have been a plot puppet. The rest of the cast is not nearly as good, however, not that the writing does them any favors.
Aside from a surprisingly effective sequence involving a dog, the film is pretty much flat. There is no emotional attatchment possible (unlike in its brilliant predecessor) because the film is a technical excercise. Yes the gore factor is higher than in the original and the fly creature makes a more extended appearance, but that is just about all there is.
Only bother with this one if it's on TV, uncut, and there is literally nothing else on. This is what "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2" was to "A Nightmare on Elm Street", though it's not as bad and the original "The Fly" was miles better than NOES 1.
This review of The Fly II (1989) was written by Eduardo C on 18 Sep 2007.
The Fly II has generally received mixed reviews.
Was this review helpful?
