The Secret Life of Pets 2 (2019)

[Malcolm R]

Title: The Secret Life of Pets 2

Genre: Adventure, Animation, Comedy, Family

Director: Chris Renaud

Cast: Jenny Slate, Kevin Hart, Harrison Ford, Tiffany Haddish

Release: 2019-07-03

Plot: A sequel to the animated hit The Secret Life of Pets.

 

[Malcolm R]

First trailer for The Secret Life of Pets 2 is out. In theaters July 3, 2019. Patton Oswalt replaces Louis CK in the voice of Max.



https://ew.com/movies/2018/11/07/the-secret-life-of-pets-2-trailer-for-the-sequel/

 

[Jake Lipson]

Patton Oswalt replaces Louis CK in the voice of Max.

With no disrespect whatsoever to Patton Oswalt, I think that's a bit of a problem because Oswalt has a very distinctive voice. We all know why C.K. can't come back, but watching that trailer, it sounds like Remy rather than being similar to how Max sounded in the trailers for the first film..

Of course, I thought the first one looked terrible and didn't see it, and I'm sure I won't see this one either, so I'm not in the market for this. But I'm surprised they didn't try to get someone who is able to make their voice sound different in each role (like, say, for example, Jim Cummings), rather than someone like Oswalt who never doesn't sound like himself.

 

[JQuintana]

I was really looking forward to the first one when the trailers for it hit. We ended up renting it and I was really disappointed with the whole story. All the funny bits for it were in the trailer. I hope this isn't the case for #2.

 

[Sam Posten]

If you guys are a fan of this series, Hop, Puss N Boots and/or Minions, recommend a follow for Brian Lynch who is one of the writers.
https://twitter.com/brianlynch
https://www.facebook.com/blynch

https://www.facebook.com/blynch/pos...d=1541685083033787&notif_t=feed_comment_reply

 

[Mike Frezon]

I was really looking forward to the first one when the trailers for it hit. We ended up renting it and I was really disappointed with the whole story. All the funny bits for it were in the trailer. I hope this isn't the case for #2.

While I agree with you 100% about the first film, I can't see expecting anything different for the sequel.

Despite how you, me and bunch of others complained that we were duped into thinking this was going to be a different film from the trailer...the first one was still pretty successful IIRC. I doubt they'll do anything different this time around.

 

[JQuintana]

Probably right on that. I'll stream it when it comes out to give it a chance at least.

 

[Malcolm R]

With no disrespect whatsoever to Patton Oswalt, I think that's a bit of a problem because Oswalt has a very distinctive voice. We all know why C.K. can't come back, but watching that trailer, it sounds like Remy rather than being similar to how Max sounded in the trailers for the first film..

Didn't bother me too much, though it's been a while since I watched the first film so I don't really recall how Max sounds in that film. Plus I was too distracted in this trailer by all the other psychotic pets.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Liked the sequel more than the first film. It was cute in spots.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Despite how you, me and bunch of others complained that we were duped into thinking this was going to be a different film from the trailer...the first one was still pretty successful IIRC. I doubt they'll do anything different this time around.

It looks like their deception from the first film caught up to them. They leveraged a dishonest trailer into a $100 million opening on the first film, but the sequel did half that - and I’m thinking that a large part of that drop is from how many people (like you and me) simply had no interest in a sequel to what the first movie actually was.

 

[Jake Lipson]

It looks like their deception from the first film caught up to them.

Yep. On the other hand, Illumination keeps their budgets relatively low for animation, so I'm sure this will still end up being profitable. However, it will be interesting to see what happens to it going forward. Normally, the Illumination film of the summer goes out later and opens after the Pixar film has already cooled off a bit. But this year Illumination went out with this ahead of Toy Story 4, and it seems like Toy Story 4 will crush it.

 

[Thomas Newton]

I’m thinking that a large part of that drop is from how many people (like you and me) simply had no interest in a sequel to what the first movie actually was.

I hear you. The thing that attracted me to the first movie was "secret life of pets" (most of the trailers), NOT "buddy film". Now one of the trailers for the second film is, once again, playing on the "secret life of pets" theme (this time, in the context of trips to the vet). But if the film is focused on that, I'm having a hard time taking that away from the reviews.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I saw this today and thought it was good with some good messages and funny sequences.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

When I saw the first "Pets", I felt it offered a pleasant surprise. Whereas others here seemed intrigued by the "what goes on in pets' minds?" premise the promos appeared to promise, I thought it looked like warmed-over "Toy Story" and wasn't excited to see the end result.

However, the original "Pets" became a pretty entertaining little flick. No, it didn't break any new ground, but it offered a satisfying comedic adventure.

The sequel? Not so much.

Sequels often have a problem in that they don't "need" to exist. Franchises like "Star Wars" can make sequels part of a longer overall narrative, but most come to fruition as money grabs: there's no substantial story that needs to be told, so the studios create them mainly for profit reasons.

That's the category into which "Pets 2" falls. This doesn't doom the film - or any others in the "doesn't need to exist" category - to failure, as plenty of those movies can still be highly entertaining, but "Pets 2" feels more like product and less like a tale with any creative inspiration behind it.

Honestly, "Pets 2" comes across as three episodes of a TV series roughly cobbled into one semi-coherent narrative. Scratch that: "Pets 2" isn't coherent at all, as it crams its three competing storylines into one clumsy whole.

Does it connect the three by the end? Yes, but only in an awkward, unsatisfying manner. The three stories have little to do with each other and don't mesh in a natural way.

The main plot - with Max on the farm - essentially rehashes "City Slickers", We get Max as the Billy Crystal character and Rooster subs for Jack Palance.

This area offers the most entertainment, solely due to Harrison Ford's presence as Rooster. While he doesn't get a lot to do, Ford's gruff and tumble performance adds charm and carries these cliche scenes.

A better made movie would've focused most of its energy on that side of things, but I guess the filmmakers didn't have much confidence that "Canine City Slickers" could carry an 85-minute movie, so we get the other plots, both of which qualify as bizarre. Snowball rescues a tiger? Gidget becomes a cat? Seriously?

Both scenarios come with some comedic potential, and Kevin Hart continues to make the most of his performance as Snowball - sort of. He gave Snowball such crazed energy that he was the highlight of the first film, whereas the domesticated Snowball of "Pets 2" seems less unhinged and fun. Still, Hart brings enough to make the part engaging.

His story seems idiotic, though, even for a movie about anthropomorphized animals. Gidget's makes a little more sense but the film invests the least in her part so we don't get a lot from it.

Honestly, "Pets 2" is a mess. It's three largely unrelated stories packed into one, and they can't create a satisfying whole. We get the occasional laugh but the end result feels half-baked and incomplete...