Laikals
The greatest movie ever made..!
SoftInloveRox
Horrible, fascist and poorly acted
SpunkySelfTwitter
It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.
adonis98-743-186503
Darkman and Durant return and they hate each other as much as ever. This time, Durant has plans to take over the city's drug trade using high-tech weaponry. Darkman must step in and try to stop Durant once and for all. Darkman II: The Return of Durant is one of those sequels that we never really asked or needed but somehow we got. Arnold Vosloo did a pretty decent job as Darkman but he is no Liam Neeson plus the direction the film takes is no Sam Raimi either. It has some good moments and special effects but 'Darkman II' feels more like a shadow to the 1st and just terrific original film. (5/10)
AaronCapenBanner
Bradford May takes over directing duties from Sam Raimi in this sequel, which also sees Arnold Vosloo take over the role of Peyton Westlake/Darkman, who is still trying to perfect his synthetic skin formula, in order to rebuild his life, but that plan is disrupted by the return of Durant, the evil gangster responsible for ruining his life. Durant did not die in the helicopter explosion, but instead survived in a coma, and after he awakens, seeks to rebuild his power by kidnapping an insane genius who can build him a powerful laser weapon.Arnold Vosloo isn't a bad replacement for Liam Neeson(who is still missed) but sequel is pretty standard stuff, with the unlikely survival of Durant stretching things; though Larry Drake is still good, film isn't, though there would be one more, filmed at the same time.
Samiam3
I know that many viewers will disagree with me, but I think Darkman II is a slight improvement from the first. Darkman may have been a more original story, but this film offers more energy and quirky fun. Rather than being kind of Abstract like Raimi was, this story at it's core falls back to an archetypal principle of super heroism, Person vs. Person conflict, good verses evil. The movie which results is not a great one but it's a neat watch.In the first movie, Dr. Westlake defeated his enemy; Crime lord, Robert G. Durant...or did he? Leaving his past behind him, Peyton went off to face the world alone, and that is how the first movie ended. Living in his new hideout deep in the bowels of the subway system, Dr. Westlake continues his research to figure out a way to permanently repair his face. His current formula can only only last him 97 minutes. One day he reads a newspaper article about a rogue scientist who is doing some similar studies. After meeting with him they decide to become partners. This other guy has an office in a vacant building which used to belong to his father, therefore it has sentimental value for him. This old factory has not gone unnoticed by Durant, who has recently woken up from the coma that Westlake put him in. Durant is ready to go back into the weapons dealing business, and he wants to base his operation in this vacant factory. He has his goons bump off the young scientist, spoiling Peyton's hope for a partnership. And that makes him mad. He must fight Durant once more.Replacing Liam Neeson in Westlake's shoes is Arnold Vosloo, (who many will recognize from The Mummy). He is not a skilled actor, but he manages okay here. It is Durant who has the bigger screen presence. He is played with a certain quirkiness to go with his two- dimensional villainous persona.Although hardy an example of good-filmaking, it should not be so quickly dismissed just because it is a strait to video release. If you were not satisfied with what you saw in Darkman, you might find a little more in this one.
Vomitron_G
I remember back in 1996, when I saw this one, being pretty disappointed. Because this movie lacks the grandeur of the original. It felt like a lesser movie, and in a way it is of course. But re-watching it, learned me to re-appreciate it, and I now even like it more than back then. It is a darn decent sequel, if you ask me. What it lacks are some heavy-weight emotional aspects of the Darkman (provided in the first one because of his love-interest), therefor the revenge-theme is bit thinner here. It also, clearly lacks a budget of the same size as the first one, making it look a little less impressive. Other than that, the movie delivers as far as most of its predecessor's characteristics go. I must add, however, if you were to take the Darkman himself out of this movie, you'd just end up with a pretty mediocre, run-of-the-mill action movie, truly worthy of the direct-to-video status. But, fortunately, he's still in it, and Darkman only still is the sole reason we watch these movies, now don't we? This time (and this might be a disappointment to many), Dr. Peyton Westlake is played by Arnold Vosloo. At the time of my first time viewing, I didn't like this very much. Now, I can only conclude Vosloo does a more than decent job stepping in Neeson's footsteps. A nice touch in the script, was having Peyton set up his laboratory on a new location, underground this time. The writers did a very good thing by bringing back Larry Drake as Durant (he's just so mean! :) and having him team up with a mad scientist/weapons inventor. Good thing too, in the plot, was having Darkman, at one point team up with a fellow scientist (Dr. Brinkman) to try and perfect his liquid skin techniques. When, later in the movie, he finds Dr. Brinkman murdered and his dreams smashed to pieces, all the agony of similar things happening to him once come back... and it's Darkman's Revenge Time again! Sadly, this movie is lacking an enjoyable climax in the end. The ending itself doesn't necessarily hint at a sequel, but it leaves the door open saying: this might turn into an on-going series.
