Darkman II: The Return Of Durant

[jason]

This topic is for discussing the first sequel to Darkman.What do you think of the plot? How do you feel about Arnold Vosloo as Darkman? Did you like Durant's inclusion in this movie? Please discuss.

[Jigsaw]

Decent sequel but it felt rushed and at times looked kind of cheap, but it was bearable. Vosloo made an acceptable Darkman although Liam Neeson was much better, and Larry Drake as before is irreplacable as Durant and owned the movie. There's also some decent action scenes, especially the opening, and as a whole it's a tolerable time. I give it a 6/10.

[T1000416]

I liked the movies plot. Those super weapons? That guy that made them was funny. “I hate meatloaf!”

Durant should not have been the villain. His return was just stupid and completely ridiculous. He could not have survived that crash and come out of it in the condition he was in. An entirely new villain would have been much better.

Vosloo made a worthy effort playing Darkman, but it didn't please me very much.

Ok, before I say anything more about it, I'm gonna give it another viewing first.

[Jigsaw]

I agree that while Drake was fantastic again as Durant, the character's return IMO wasn't needed. At least, he should've been terribly scarred and disfigured, because for him to look almost normal was very unbelievable even by comic book standards.

[T1000416]

Watched it last night, and I have another con. The acting sucks. Especially Vosloo's. The way he would slam his fist on tables, or yell “NO!” all the time was too d**n cheesy. His makeup sucked too. His mouth and jaw wouldn't even move when he talked.

Larry Drake wasn't all that good either. His goons were lame.

[Jigsaw]

I thought the acting was servicable but it could've been better. The movie was obviously rushed and shot on the cheap, and the actors probably didn't have a whole lot of rehearsal time to perfect their performances. Vosloo was a half-decent Darkman but IMO he's much better when he plays villains (check him out in Hard Target). Drake was the real standout IMO, but I agree that his gang wasn't nearly as interesting as in the original film.

[jason]

Vosloo was a descent Darkman. He played the character differently then Neeson though. I saw one review that said that Vosloo lacked Liam Neeson's "manic rage" as Darkman. I say that this is probably an accurate assessment. Vosloo seemed a little too normal and restrained as Darkman. At some points this movie also felt like a rehash of the first one. It was mildly entertaining though.

[Jigsaw]

I agree that Vosloo's Darkman was a little too normal and at times kind of wooden. But I guess the more normal Darkman of the sequels might've been an indicator that the character was slowly but surely accepting his more isolated and sheltered existance since being disfigured.

As far as direct-to-video sequels go, neither Darkman sequel was horrible. The problems they both had was the fact that they were obviously rushed and the small budgets probably limited a lot of what the filmmakers may have originally wanted to do, but they both make for decent entertainment. If anything, I'm just glad that we got to see more of Darkman.

[Trogdor]

demondownbelow said:

I agree that Vosloo's Darkman was a little too normal and at times kind of wooden. But I guess the more normal Darkman of the sequels might've been an indicator that the character was slowly but surely accepting his more isolated and sheltered existance since being disfigured.

I was going to say the same thing. Vosloo was did fine I think.

[Jigsaw]

The more I watch the sequels, the more it makes sense that Peyton/Darkman was probably growing more and more used to his new existance, hence why he seems so normal in the sequels.