It's a sequel people, but is it faithful?
2 November 2002
Sequel yes, why? Who knows but if you take this movie into it's own little world and try and not link it to the first movie (which I must admit can be hard, with the original Hanson Brothers still on the same minor league ice hockey team) try not to think of it has a sequel because it will spoil the first one for you.

The first one was a cult classic hit for sport movies. But this one, isn't exactly the worst sport movie I've ever seen. The hockey probably wasn't enough to keep sport movie fans attentions, but it did have enough for the non sport lovers to actually think "oooh violence on ice-not bad" a little go ;)

Callum Keith Rennie (an astounded Canadian actor - who probably signed for this film because of the first ones status and a film about ice hockey) is slightly wasted in this movie. We can see him in other roles that show of his natural talents as a brilliant actor, but playing Palmberg, it was enough to keep watching and laughing.

A female coach... ohhh not really that much of a plot twister... and Stephen Baldwin's screen performance wasn't exactly fantastic.

I think people reacted badly to this film because of the first one. They should never have plainly labelled it as a sequel as the "straight to DVD" shows how much it was liked by audiences (it just wasn't.)

But I had four of my wisdom teeth removed the weekend I rented this and it kept me occupied long enough to forget about the big open wounds in my gums, so really, give this film a chance. You can laugh, if you can just get over the fact that this film is a sequel. - :)
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed