Inspector Gadget 2 (2003 Video) User Reviews

It was OK.

[polenta3 · 3/10 · 11 July 2003]

It was ok, I liked the 1st one better, I never like it when they go and change the characters, theres just something wrong with that...and some of the deleted scences on the DVD should have been in the movie, it would have made more sense to me, plus alot of those scences included penny which she was a main character solving the crime (like usual if you think back to the cartoon) but they hardly show her enough working with brain, just one scene. I rented it, but definatly not worth buying or copying/seeing at the theater...I just rented it.

Its better then its original

[kristian-holsbovag · 4/10 · 22 December 2012]

The first inspector gadget movie, ignored everything about the show and instead started its own thing. But with inspector gadget 2 they had all the elements, all the things that inspector gadget was about. Claw being hidden, penny solving the case, gadget being an idiot as usual ignoring the most obvious things, just like the cartoon. Although it isn't the best movie I've seen, its not the worst either, this movie is just a "MEH" in general, i can say this is more "inspector gadget" then the first movie was. So ignore the first one, watch this one. You can take the cartoon as this movies prequel, and let it just be about gadget finding a woman or whatever you want it to be this movie is inspector gadget, the other movie is inspector someone else

don't go go gadget

[khecht2 · 3/10 · 4 June 2006]

I couldn't wait til this movie would finally be released and when I got it for my birthday I couldn't wait to go home and watch it, but after seeing i felt like i wasted my aunt's money. Elaine Hendrix is probably the best actor in this entire movie. She does an awesome job as G2. Caitlyn Wachs does an okay job filling in as the role of Penny. However French Stewart does an awful job as Inspector Gadget. There are parts of the movie that are funny and good. Brain is one of the cutest beagles you will ever see and Inspector Gadget's car is so funny. And the bar scene made me laugh a little. However this isn't the movie I would recommend but what the heck give it a chance, you may like it. All I know is that i didn't.

more of a cartoon turned movie then sequel

[Ash-Attack · 5/10 · 20 January 2004]

if u look at this movie and you are a fan of the cartoon you will notice that this movie is very closer to the cartoon then the first one. that said it is just an avarage movie funny but too stupid and the lead actor French Stewart is bad but to be honest makes a better gadget them matthew broderick. claw is protrayed better by the director and writer.. for exsmple in the cartoon you never see claws face and he always escapes...

all in all so bits of this movie should have been in the first one and if they had it would have turned the first one into a better movie... it is fun but dont watch it as a sequel watch it as another adventure.

Absolute Garbage.

[dprokop-1 · 1/10 · 24 May 2006]

Man, this movie was worse than the reviews (and the reviews were really bad). I thought that the first was bad enough, but when I saw this I was shocked. I can't even believe that someone could make a movie this bad, I mean I could probably make a better movie with a camera about shoelaces. This movie was a big waste of time and I sooooooo regret watching it. If only I could give it 0 out of 10. Good thing Matthew Broderick didn't sign up for this movie cause then he would be completely humiliated and considered a bad actor. The only reason I rented this movie was to see if it was worse than the first, which sucked. Anyways, I don't recommend this movie to anyone unless you're a 3 - year old idiot who eats his snot.

Is that the guy from clockstoppers? Yes it is!

[xenophonnelson · 1/10 · 11 December 2004]

Wow. I had no idea a movie could be so awful. I mean I've seen the Ed Wood movie Plan 9 from Outer Space, but this was just one of those"Are you F*%king kidding me" movies. I mean why did they even bother making this if Matthew Broderick wouldn't come back. If Ferris Bueller won't do it, there's probably not to much promise in it. About the movie, why didn't any of the criminals just smash the G2 robot-thing, I mean how hard can it be to whack her in the head with a lead pipe and wrap her up with some chains then tear her apart with crow bars. Why did they need to replace Inspector Gadget anyway, oh yeah, so they could at least have something to make a sequel about. Bad story gone worse describes this whole thing.

I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but I absolutley HATED this movie!

[Ericho · 17 June 2003]

Okay, I'm gonna admit it right here and now. I liked the first IG. I know most people hate it, but I thought it was a very nice little movie. But THIS. This was just plain silly!!

Nothing at all made any sense at all. Okay, now I thought in the first movie, John Brown/Inspector Gadget got a girlfriend, but WHERE IS SHE IN THIS MOVIE???!!! Second of all, how the heck could a human guy like IG fall in love with a robot??!!! What the heck where the writers thinking??!!!!! How could a human/robot breed with a robot?! ROBOTS HAVE NO REPRODUCTIVE ORGANS!!! The whole thing was totally whacked! And IG was just annoying in this movie!!! He was nothing but a smart-aleck know-it-all who was stupid and totally unfunny. Sheesh, what in the world happened to him after the first film?? And I hate what they did with Claw. How come in the first movie, he talked normal, but in this movie he has that wierd robot voice. Also, how come he turned into an old man? WHAT THE HECK WAS GOING ON HERE??!!!!

Overall, this movie was just dead awful to me. It made no sense at all. This piece of crap gets a big fat, 1/10!!! Once again, I apologize to "The Secret Of Nimh". This movie, along with MST3K's "Invasion Of The Neptune Men" were worse.

You say Inspector, I say Inspector -- Let's call the whole thing off!

[film-critic · 1/10 · 13 October 2007]

"Inspector Gadget 2" is possibly one of the worst sequels to dawn the direct-to-DVD call tag at the bottom of the box. Using nothings from the original film (not the same characters, not the same style, not the same comic timing), this film is one that you have to watch alone, not standing right next to the original Broderick vehicle. French Stewart (he is always squinting ... why?), with the aid of director Alex Zamm try to bring the original concept back the the series without any known budget. Stewart brings a new Inspector to the film, a more arrogant, snobbish, seems to be tormented by life, protagonist that cares nothing for those surrounding him. He is a character that we cannot love, no matter how many times we have to sit through one viewing of this film. What is interesting about Stewart is that he is actually closer to the the animated Gadget than the original. Zamm also tries to create a Dr. Claw that is closer to the original – but the trouble occurs with the fact that the two share very little screen time and thus there is no real chemistry between the two. Claw used to always monitor Gadget's doings, in this one, there seems to be a haphazard care as to what either is doing. Penny still doesn't have her book and Brain still isn't getting anyone out of trouble. Where is the consistency here? Too add to the mix, we are introduced to a new character "G2", the newest upgrade to the Gadget line. Like anything this riddled with clichés, there is an initial problem with the two of them, but eventually a spark misfires and Gadget is introduced to yet another love interest. Considering the problems anatomically with this couple, there is no further spark between them. The only reason the two are put in a this film are to be together, not for any other purpose. There is no sense of individualism, just flimsy cause followed by an effect that could have been predicted before the opening credits ended.

"Inspector Gadget 2" has not seen the best reviews, nor will it get a good one from me – it tried, but ultimately it failed. There was no purpose to create this erroneous sequel. Disney was hoping to cash in on the Broderick fan base, the younger generation that knows no better , or just to make some extra dollars to pad their bottom line, but there was no reason to resurrect this already problematic series. I hated Elaine Hendrix's mesh between "Robocop" and "Judge Dredd". She was funny at parts that were not meant to be funny, and chokingly bad at parts that were meant to draw sympathy from the audience. Perhaps it was the writing, or the campy way that it was filmed, or the cheesy ploy to get audiences to laugh, but this sequel just left me out to dry. If I had to speak positively about this film in any way, I would have to comment on the CGI which did improve a bit with this lower-budget film. I thought the idea of "freezing-time" was a fun concept equal to what Claw would do, but again, we seemed to lack the spunk and originality of the cartoon. I would never consider this franchise a remake of the cartoon, but instead their own unoriginal spin-off.

I blame Disney a bit for this film because cutting corners and cost is not an excuse for making poor films. If Broderick or even the horrid Everett could not reprise their roles for this sequel, it should have just stopped there. Don't push a circular peg into a square hole, but instead we continued to push and found cheap replacements for the original. This is a very kid friendly moment that if I were 3, would probably find visually entertaining, but from a company that prides itself on making Oscar-worthy animation, I expect a higher level of distribution. French Stewart should stop working while he still is remembered for his humorous work on "Third Rock from the Sun", while the rest of this cast shouldn't even bother with another feature. I think it is bad enough that they couldn't even get Cheri Oteri back, cause, you know, she's expensive.

Overall, I have to say that "Inspector Gadget 2" is a blunderment of a film, and the one star review that I am giving it is generous. There is no need for these types of films to enter into mainstream cinema. It dulls the senses for those hoping to find engrossing cinema out there, and proves that a mind isn't necessary to watch French in action. As a cinematic community, we have to put a stop to this. Zamm attempted to retain some of the originality of the cartoon, but couldn't compile a cast good enough to bring the humor, form, grace, and talent of the animated series to light. There was no chemistry between anyone, and when the clichés began to cause a horrid avalanche, I was caught with nowhere to hide. If I had to end with a thought in mind, it would be this – Claw never showed his face, this can be learned from watching the pilot "Inspector Gadget" where he had a mustache, so you shouldn't be able to see his face in the films. It is simple. It would be like creating the Smurfs live-action where they were a shade of orange instead of blue. You just don't do it. So, when it comes to this film – just don't do it. You will be happier, and no so bitter like myself.

Grade: * out of *****

Feels a tad better but still average

[breakdownthatfilm-blogspot-com · 5/10 · 20 November 2015]

Disney today has gone through multiple changes throughout its history. There's the classical period, the slump period, the renaissance period and the rise to super studio power in the late 2000s. However even during the 1990s when Disney was breaking records in its animated films, they also were breaking records in flops in another type of film. Those films were in live-action, many of which were derived from cartoons from decades before. For those cases, Disney had made some pretty bad films. Mr. Magoo (1997), George of the Jungle (1997) and Inspector Gadget (1999) being relatively the last bunch of theatrical releases to be made, for the most part signaled the end of such cartoon live-action adaptations. But even for Disney, nothing would stop the studio giant from making a little extra cash even after that. Some years later, Disney would release sequels to some of these movies and for the poorly adapted Inspector Gadget (1999), he too got his own. The question is, is it worth a watch?

Ehhh,...in some respects yes because there seems to be improvement. Then again, there really was no need to begin with because a sequel will not make up for the mistakes of the first. With a script written by the director Alex Zamm (Chairman of the Board (1998), Tooth Fairy 2 (2012) and Jingle All the Way 2 (2014)) and two other writers, the adaptation part of the film is more faithful to that of the original cartoon. And for some viewers, that may be all they need because the entirety of the movie does feel more cartoonish than that of the first movie. When Dr. Claw (Tony Martin) escapes from prison, it's up to Inspector Gadget (French Stewart), his niece Penny (Caitlin Wachs) and newly activated member G2 (Elaine Hendrix) to bring the evil mastermind to justice. The idea is as routine as ever but it again sticks to the formula that made the cartoon what it was. Also what makes this film more faithful than the one before is that most of Dr. Claw's face is kept concealed from the audience. It was a big gripe people had with the 1999 film.

As stated in the plot prior, much of the cast from the first film have been replaced or rewritten out. The only actor who didn't get replaced was D.L. Hughley as the Gadget Mobile; because people loved him the most? Also there's no mention of whatever happened to Joely Fisher's role as Brenda who played Gadget's love interest in the first movie. French Stuart as Gadget looks more like his cartoon counterpart than Matthew Broderick. Caitlin Wachs taking over Michelle Trachtenberg's role performed okay but nothing special. As for Claw, Tony Martin's portrayal Vs Rupert Everett is not hilariously funny but it's alright. Elaine Hendrix as G2 was okay even though her role was very contrived. It's pretty obvious what she serves as to Gadget. If there's one thing that stays true through this film is that almost every actor chews up the scenery around them. Almost every scene is super hammy. It's not bad occasionally or maybe for one character but even the less important characters are biting at the corners of every frame.

With that being said, the comedy isn't that funny either. Thankfully, Disney toned down the inappropriate humor from the first film but didn't bother fix anything else. The one liners are formulaic and predictable but they do at least sound more believable being delivered from Stewart than Broderick. Dr. Claw also has a bunch of stock henchman that do act like the cartoon but here just feel silly. Of all things, why would Dr. Claw hire a single ninja? Also sometimes the dialog doesn't make a lot of sense due to certain characters having knowledge that goes unexplained. How would one specific character know how a mechanical device works if the villain didn't even give the obligatory exposition to them? The stretch of the imagination only goes so far. Seeing Dr. Claw make a weapon out of 3 or 4 non-connective items is one thing, but knowing how it works without even being told? Yeah,...not buying it.

Even with this mediocre writing, there is still some visual integrity. The special effects to this entry are adequate for its budget even though they are not as polished as the first film. However considering it was 12 million Vs 75 million (estimated), that's not entirely bad. There are places where it's noticeably fake though. The cinematography shot by Geoffrey Wharton who is usually just a camera operator does okay here. There's no strange angles or up close facial zoom-ins so that's praiseworthy. Anything else though is just standard shooting. The musical score composed by Chris Hajian is okay too. Even though the sound is not as bombastic as John Debney's version of the first one, Hajian retains the Inspector Gadget theme and does what he can to make it sound acceptable for a DVD sequel. The overall product is still messy but some may like it more than the original film.

Having its cast mainly replaced, the actors are a lot hammier, the comedy is still predictable and the effects do look somewhat cheaper. However some of the writing does follow the cartoon more this time than the first movie and although not everything makes sense it feels more like an extended cartoon episode. So that kind works in its favor.

What is this?

[georgehazard73 · 1/10 · 11 May 2020]

There's probably a good reason it was direct-to-DVD. It was TERRIBLE. They took pretty much nothing from the original movie, which I've enjoyed as a kid and an adult as it showed what it could've been like for Gadget first trying out his gadgets and how that procedure was done. G2 served little purpose other than bad humor. The original series never had anything like her and she even explained a poorly written joke. It cannot even be considered a sequel if nothing is taken from the previous movie. It's just a disaster. Not even the original crew made it to the sequel but I doubt even they could've saved this movie.

Very poor sequel to a mediocre film

[TheLittleSongbird · 1/10 · 16 September 2009]

The first film was a disappointing and mediocre film, but actually was reasonably entertaining. There has been the general impression that the sequel is better than the first film, but I can't agree. Yes, I accept it was more faithful than the brilliant cartoon show, but I still think it was a very poor sequel.

The script was very very weak, and even lower in laughs than the first film. I liked the idea of Dr Claw escaping from jail, but the pace of this film was way too fast, and lacked energy as well as felt rushed. And the editing was choppy, and the effects substandard.

The performances were pretty dire. French Stewart proves once again, like he did in the excrement that is Home Alone 4, that he falls well short of the charisma and energy of his character and came across as rather wooden. I didn't like Tony Martin's Dr Claw either. I much preferred Rupert Everett's suave take on the classic villain, and Martin hamming-up came close to embarrassing rather than entertaining. In fact, the only redeeming quality, and this is a slight one, is the talented Caitlin Wachs, who deserved better.

Overall, very poor, don't waste your time. 1/10 Bethany Cox

MUCH more faithful the the cartoon!

[DesertHedgehog · 8/10 · 12 March 2003]

Although IG2 is a bit sillier than the first movie, it's MUCH more faithful to the cartoon - once again Gadget says "wowsers!" (compared to "wowser" in the first one) and Dr. Claw (called both Claw and Dr. Claw) is faceless again. There is also no "John Brown" - it's just Inspector Gadget. Penny, although she has different hairstyles throughout the film, often wears her hair in her trademark pigtails of the cartoon.

At first I thought that Elaine Hendrix would be awful as G2, but she proved me wrong. She played her part extremely well. Although French Stewart doesn't have the boyish charm of Matthew Broderick, he acts more like the Inspector Gadget of the cartoon. (And don't worry - he doesn't try to play Mr. Magoo!)

This movie is also amazingly cartoon-like. The best way I can describe it is a "live-action cartoon". It's live action, but with all the silly stunts of an animated cartoon. (Such as a scene involving Gadget getting his head stuck in a toilet.) Although the CGI wasn't as good as it could have been, it wasn't too awful.

If you're looking for a film that's true to the cartoon, IG2 is definitely worth seeing. Be warned, though, it's quite silly! :)

It's funny... that's about it

[robyn-710-767167 · 6/10 · 19 May 2011]

I saw the first and loved it. The second one had new actors, a totally different plot, nothing from the first film is recognized.

However, they have MANY laughs, many cool special effects, and so on. Also, the way they presented the story, although kind of lame, was done well. But I watched this with my 7 year old sister who did enjoy it quite well and I was surprised that she wasn't scared during the "Scary parts"

The DVD actually contains a lot of potentially interesting and informative information about how they made the movie, which is helping me as a wannabe-filmer to get ideas and knowledge about filming.

So I rate this 5/10, mostly because of humor and special effects.

I HATE THIS FILM

[jmcgee-1 · 1/10 · 23 December 2003]

I hate this movie so much with love.I love French Stewart,but I hate him in this.This film makes no sense what so ever.How did claw get old when this film takes place 4 years later.Why didn't penny get older.Why does the town look different.Why is Gadget still stupid when his glitches are fix.Why ask why.This is stupid.Too many question,none of the answers.

Much Better than the First!!!

[silverhunter · 14 March 2003]

I used to watch the Inspector Gadget Television show all of the time, and so going into the first movie I was hoping it would retain certain elements of the show. However, that first movie changed so much (the most notable being the odd reworking of Dr. Claw) that it didn't feel like Inspector Gadget anymore.

This movie, on the other hand, is excellent, because it discards trying to be in continuity with the first in order to be much more like the show. The character dynamic of the show (including the faceless villian) has been restored. Now, Gadget is once again a bumbling idiot who is saved only by those around him. At first I thought the inclusion of G2 would hamper the film, but her part is well integrated and this is still Gadget's movie. It's very funny, silly, and stylized, and probably good enough to have been in theaters. Forget about the continuity errors in relation to the first film, and enjoy live-action Gadget the way it should have been in the first place.

**** out of ****

Bad Characterization by French Stewart. Disappointing waste of time

[diaz7367 · 1/10 · 11 October 2008]

When I first knew that French Stewart was playing Inspector Gadget, I thought, "great!". The cartoon Inspector Gadget had the voice, quirkiness and Klutziness that French Stewart had in his character of Harry from Third Rock From The Sun. Whan I watched Third Rock From the Sun before this sequel of Inspector Gadget came out, I thought Harry sounded just like Inspector Gadget. I thought when I saw the first version, he would have played a much better character than Matthew Broderick. Later, I was excited when I learned French had been cast for the role. However, my excitement turned to disappointment during the first few minutes of Inspector Gadget 2. Harry was more the Inspector Gadget character than the Inspector Gadget he played in this movie. He seems sedated, on a heavy dose of sleep inducing tranquilizers. If he had only played his "Harry" character in Inspector Gadget 2, French Stewart could've been a good Inspector Gadget. The film is bland, the story is dumb and boring. It's not worth the time to waste watching any of it.

Horrible, Wtf happened to Matthew?

[anthonyschild · 1/10 · 3 January 2020]

Even as a young kid I thought number 2 was trash. Hated it. Matthew Broderick will always be the original for me. He was a great Inspector Gadget. French Stewart was great in 3rd Rock from Sun. But after ruined everything he touched. They should have changed the actor and personality of the character.

Go Go Gadget Horrible Sequel

[jeremycrimsonfox · 2/10 · 15 April 2019]

As a man who liked the first film despite its numerous flaws, I hated Inspector Gadget 2. A sequel that is one of Disney's direct-to-video money makers, this film sees Inspector Gadget replaced by female police robot G2 as Dr. Claw has broken out of prison (and hiding his face like in the cartoon so children don't realize he's not the same actor as the first film). The two must learn to work together to save the day.

Yeah, this sounds a lot like this would work better as an episode of the cartoon than a DTV movie. The only two things good about this is French Stewart nailing Inspector Gadget, and the fact that the film is somewhat closer to the cartoon in terms of Dr. Claw and his schemes. However, those two things cannot save it. G2 is basically another pointless character who was added in as nothing more than to serve as the complete opposite of Inspector Gadget, as where he was clumsy and clueless, G2 is serious and more focused. Plus, the film seems to have some continuity errors, as characters or events from the first film are either missing or removed, and the special effects look like this film was originally planned as a 3D film (especially when we see CGI gears flying towards the screen in one scene). This sequels tries to be more like the cartoon it's based on, but fails miserably.

Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law

[freakfire-1 · 1/10 · 24 March 2008]

French Stewart, we hardly knew ye. We hardly knew ye beyond the showe thou callest "Third Rock From The Sun". Because, let every viewer face it, it will be his only real success in his career. Everything else will pale in comparison.

Stewart, as Gadget, was weak. He arrests an old granny for going .3 mph over the speed limit. Kind of stupid and not even funny. The set up was all wrong. Plus enter G2 (Gadget 2), who is modeled as a woman, and Gadget likes her. For some reason, dumb robots fall for one another.

What is so screwed is is that the Claw from the first one is no longer there. So this feels like a cheap original and not a very cheap sequel. Nobody from the original is in the sequel. And that is sad.

Overall, its worse than the first. Sometimes shows should just be kept as cartoon and not turned into real life versions. And Inspector Gadget is such an example. "F"

Another Disney Formula Travesty

[Hollywood_Yoda · 2/10 · 20 September 2018]

In a review of the first Inspector Gadget film, I mentioned how Matthew Broderick was not a good fit for the lead. Well, the squinty-eyed, loudmouth French Stewart as the Inspector was a true travesty of great proportions. The worst casting ever!

What was Alex Zamm thinking? I know it's a direct to video film, but come on! Robert Vince has done 15 Air Bud franchise films and they're still better than this. This sequel makes the first Inspector Gadget look like it was written by William Shakespeare!

The worst movie of 2003

[mervclan · 1/10 · 21 November 2010]

The first inspector gadget was great I watch it again when I was 5 I once saw one eps of the spin off series and the inspector gadget Christmas and then the cartoon series I hered about the 2nd one coming out I got it out on DVD I thought it was going to be cool but it sucked it was so boring. This ruined a good show and we will start off with characters a new female robot is in this film and gadget feels in love with her I mean what is Disney thinking like what ever happen to his ather girlfriend from first film and why is his boss young first he was this old man now he is this 40 year old bossie man who is just as worst as gadget now and gadget has be come this bossie no fun guy I mean what ever happen to him ever since the first film this has to be one of the worst movies of 2003 its almost as bad as son of the mask oh yeah that was bad that was really bad so if you where me I would say don't watch this movie its bad as it can get so don't get this movie out one its a big waste of time stick to the first one OK I would say the first one is better. if your a big fan of inspector gadget or you like inspector gadget then you night not like this film. Awful plot Awful characters Awful songs.

Yep, this is terrible. Agreed

[r96sk · 3/10 · 11 October 2020]

Yep, this is terrible. Agreed.

Unlike most, I can say I enjoyed 1999's 'Inspector Gadget'. I didn't like this though. I wasn't necessarily expecting it to be better per se, but I did hear that it's supposedly more faithful to the original television show so I thought there was a possibility it would be, at least, just as good - it isn't.

Everything about 'Inspector Gadget 2' is severely inferior. The cast aren't as noteworthy, there aren't any - even mildly - amusing scenes and the whole vibe of the film is cheap. It even runs for longer, mostly due to it forcing through a hearty narrative with the characters - wholesomeness simply doesn't fit in a production that needs to be 100% silly.

None of the original cast return, with the exception of D. L. Hughley (Gadgetmobile) - though he is barely in this sequel. Elaine Hendrix ('The Parent Trap') is a decent name/face, her character G2 is possibly the most interesting thing onscreen.

1.5 average rating on Letterboxd, entirely deserved - unlike it's predecessor's score.

It's good. But Underrated.

[mariomurderer111-1 · 9/10 · 24 September 2008]

I really enjoyed watching this. There are 2 Inspector Gadget movies, the first one was made in 1999. This is the second one, but it doesn't continue from the 1st since it is a different director and it was released straight to DVD. This film is an alternative to the second film. If you didn't like the first film and wanted it to be more like the cartoons, then this one is for you. I liked both IG movies. This film introduces a new robot - IG2. The movie has an entire different cast, and Dr Claw's face is hardly ever seen like in the cartoons Nice special effects too, with a cartoon-like "let's stop the bad guys" ending. I find it funny and enjoyable.

More Goofier then the First but fun

[joshfedderson · 7/10 · 29 July 2018]

Mr. Gadget returns but with a completely different actor and cast. I think the film makers were trying to redeem themselves from the downfall that came from the first one. It worked but only a little.

Inspector Gadget is trying to do whats right but he keeps messing up, eventually a new more improved gadget comes along, this time it's a robot of a kick butt woman. The claw returns from the first film but we never see his actual face which was kind of disappointing but it kept the mystery up.

This new gadget was fun, but it still had the damper humor as the first one and it seemed more cartoonish, almost like Who Framed Roger Rabbit. I mostly liked it because of the attractive actress who played G2, she was pretty hot. And this time Penny seems more the hero then her goofy gadget uncle.

7/10 for Inspector Gadget 2

Worse movie but better gadget than the first.

[Shopaholic35 · 3/10 · 18 April 2014]

The second installment of the Inspector Gadget film series is fairly comparable to the first movie. Although this movie is stupider the fact that they picked a better gadget this time round was an improvement. Unfortunately the problem is the movie is just so terrible so the "better" gadget does not save it.

To be honest this movie is a watch once and slightly enjoy it but then you never need to watch it again. I do think Elaine Hendrix does a god job at portraying G2 though. She gives the movie a sense of sanity that stops the movie from being a complete joke. Don't bother if you have a short attention span.