102 Dalmatians (2000) User Reviews

Sure, it's inferior to the first, but lets not get too harsh.

[vip_ebriega · 6/10 · 8 May 2007]

My take: Not as good as the first, but decent family fun nonetheless.

Yes we know, it's kid's stuff compared to the original, which is an enjoyable film, no less. This one follows where the original left off. Cruella "Ella" DeVille is kept in prison, and a group of scientist have altered her mind, turning her from evil to a good. Sadly, when the Big Ben rings its chimes, compassionate little Ella turns back to evil Cruella, with plots to capture more puppies for her "Poppy Coat" and for vengeance.

Of course, this one adds one more puppy to the 101 others. Sadly only one of the puppies from the first makes it here (of course, he's full-grown now), it's none other than Dipstick. Besides the dog, Cruella and her stuttering butler Alonzo (Tim McInnerny), no other character from the first film returns for this sequel. The plot, if you removed some elements, is basically similar to the first film. Making this a formulaic sequel, but let's not get to harsh in reviewing this. You got to admit it still has some entertainment value, despite the flaws. The puppies are cute, as always, and some of the laughs are well enjoyable for the kiddies.

So overall, not a brilliant flick, but a fun one for the family.

Rating: *** out of 5.

Well, the puppies were cute...

[jennifer-99 · 6/10 · 27 November 2000]

I decided that this was going to be the first movie that I took my young daughter to see. Seeing as how she is a dog lover and is riveted to the TV screen every time she sees a commercial or TV show with a puppy, I figured how could I go wrong?

I was sadly disappointed. I found that the movie tried too hard to be dark and sinister....Cruella got way too much screen time and the puppies, too little. The movie just wasn't much fun. Amazingly, my daughter got an hour or so of entertainment from this film, and then got horribly bored. We ended up leaving before the movie was finished, so I'm not even sure how it ended.

The movie was cute, but it ran way too long for the younger set who have a reduced attention span. More time should have been devoted to the puppies and their antics, and less to Cruella and her scheming. I don't believe I was the only one who felt this way....as my daughter and I were leaving the theatre, I noticed two youngsters fast asleep. Not a good testimonial for a children's film.

Save this one for a video rental so your kids can fast forward through the boring bits before they, too, fall fast asleep.

More of those cute little puppies...

[chrisbrown6453 · 5/10 · 20 July 2001]

Unlike its predecessor, which was a live action version of the animated 101 Dalmatians, this version is completely new and original. However, the premise is as old as they get: boy finds girl, boy gets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl again, and they all live happily ever after. Of course, I'm not giving anything away here because the movie is not about the humans; it's about the dogs and one bird. And you can't leave out the bird. The bird is the real star of the movie. His name is Waddlesworth, and he is a MacCaw that does more than just talk -- he converses. The voice is that of Eric Idle (of Monty Python fame). Waddlesworth thinks he's a dog and cannot fly and is the comic relief for the movie, adding asides for our enjoyment.

This film is better than 101 Dalmatians, which in its own right was very good, and both children and adults will enjoy it. It is pure entertainment. My teenager and six-year-old both liked it and said Waddlesworth was their favorite character. This is typical Disney entertainment: Wholesome with just enough adult humor for mom and dad, excitement for the teenagers, and tenderness for the younger ones. Besides, who doesn't like a little puppy? This movie has 102 of them!

Glenn close

[ren-vassilliou · 20 September 2011]

I was involved in this production in 2000, i always remember we were on location in the city under this old station , may have been Mile End , it rained for about two weeks non stop and i alway remember the water coming through the cracks of the station , the scene was the Catwalk , I remember that in between scenes everyone was looking for a warm corner to stay warm , Glenn close was very friendly with all the members around , i got talking to her for about 5-10 mins and she was the most friendliest ,nicest person you can talk to , she is up there as one the the best in dealing with the conditions and people around 10/10 for that ...

Oh I will be harsh!

[pkzeewiz · 2/10 · 12 April 2010]

Cruella has been in jail and in her time there a doctor has worked with her and made her change and become a brand new person. She now loves puppies and hates fur and comes out a brand new woman. She tires her best but for stupid reason, which never gets explained in the movie, the ticking of Big Ben (the London tower clock) she goes mad and goes back to her evil self. After she had gotten out of jail, and before she turned back to her old self, she helped organize a puppy "safe house". After she goes back she once again wants more dalmatians and although different in action, same in story as far as her getting them stolen and all attempts are captured in goofy glory as we see a less funny version of part one over again.

Production was bad in this one, definitely a lower budget, and no where near the time and effort and talent devoted into this one. The music was bad, the acting was bad (for the most part) and its just a waste of time. Sequels often suck, so its not that big of a deal, you should know what you are getting.

Glenn Close did a great job again, but her character was written badly here, so her acting couldn't save it. Most of the acting was mediocre at best. Ben Crompton did a good job as Ewan and thats about the only person that stood out. Eric idle as the voice of that stupid bird was annoying too.

This movie is something you might shut your "youngins" up with for an hour and a half but it's a truly inferior film to its predecessor. Was hard for me to set through. 2 out of 10 stars.

a pale imitation of it's predecessor

[disdressed12 · 5/10 · 13 November 2008]

unfortunately,this second live action film is a pale imitation of its predecessor.it's a lot slower,and the story feels contrived.it almost seems like filler to me.there are a few comic moments,though not as many as its predecessor.i think they should have left it at the first one,101 Dalmatians.Glenn Close returns as Cruella De Vil,and is good,but has much less to do this time around.plus,her two henchmen form th preventions film are not in this one,and they added some comic relief.Gerard Depardieu is in this one,in a completely ridiculous role,and he looks quite silly,to be polite.despite its problems its still watchable.my vote for 102 Dalmations is a 5/10

A dog of a dog movie

[Rob-120 · 1/10 · 14 November 2006]

A sequel to (actually a remake of) Disney's 1996 live-action remake of 101 Dalmations. Cruella deVil (Glenn Close) is released from prison after being "cured" of her obsession with fur by a psychologist named Dr. Pavlov (ugh!). But the "cure" is broken when Cruella hears the toll of Big Ben, and she once again goes on a mad quest to make herself the perfect coat out of dalmation hides.

This movie is bad on so many levels, starting with the fact that it's a "Thanksgiving family schlock" movie designed to suck every last available dime out of the Disney marketing machine. Glenn Close over-over-over-over-acts as Cruella. With all that she had to put up with in this movie -- the lame script, the endless makeup, getting baked in a cake at the end -- I hope they gave her an extremely-large paycheck.

(Speaking of which, where in the world are you going to find a fur coat factory, a bakery with a Rube Goldberg assembly line, and a candlelight restaurant all located within the same building -- as you do in the climax of this film?) Of course, the real stars of the movie are supposed to be the dogs. They serve as the "Macaulay Culkin's" of this movie, pulling all the stupid "Home Alone" gags on the villains. (Biting them in the crotch, running over their hands with luggage carts, squirting them with icing, etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum.) I have to admit, the dogs were fairly good actors -- much better than the humans.

Gerard Depardieu is completely wasted in this movie as a freaked-out French furrier. The two human "dog lovers" -- rehashed from the earlier film, but with different actors -- are completely boring. When they have a spaghetti dinner at an Italian restaurant, the movie cuts back and forth between the two lovers, and their dogs at home, watching the dinner scene from "Lady and the Tramp." I thought to myself, "Oh please, don't go there!" I half-expected the humans to do a satire on the "Lady and the Tramp" dinner scene -- as Charlie Sheen did in "Hot Shots: Part Deux" -- doing the "spaghetti strand kiss," pushing the meatball with his nose, etc.

And don't get me started on the annoying parrot with Eric Idle's voice.

The costumes were nominated for an Oscar, and the costumes in the movie *are* good. But they are the only good thing in the movie. The rest of it is unbearable dreck.

4.6? REALLY people you have got to be kidding me right

[lisafordeay · 7/10 · 9 May 2013]

Why the low rating? I thought it was a very enjoyable film and its even just as good as the 1st one which was fantastic. The story maybe kinda slow in a few places and there is new actors filling in from Jeff Daniels and Joey Richardson,but still I enjoyed it.

The film kicks off where Cruella De Vil played by the fantastic Glen Close is finally cured from her mayhem of getting the dalmatians and killing them for their fur. But there is a catch as the hypnosis actually wears off when the Big Ben chimes and she goes back to being the crazy dog killer again. Of course we are introduced to Chloe who is Cruella's patrol officer and Kevin who owns a dog pound both played by husband and wife duo Alice Evans and Ioan Grudffud.So what do I like about this movie well I think its got to do with the stars of the film THE DOGS and yes I am a dog lover so maybe that's why I enjoyed this flick. The acting is superb and I think this has to be the most underrated flick I have seen of all time. I mean it doesn't deserve a 4.6 rating if it got a 6.7 fair enough but really a 4.6??

Oh well at least I liked this movie. Directed by Kevin Lima who also directed Tarzan and of course Enchanted,102 Dalmatians is strictly for animal lovers.

7/10

Very disappointing

[RichardKleiner · 4/10 · 9 October 2007]

After seeing the 1996 remake, I thought it was the funniest way to see Cruella De Vil getting her punishment for torturing animals just for their skin. The whole movie was quite funny, and on my view, better than the animated one. But there was actually no need for a second one. First of all, if Cruela is returning, don't cure her and make her insane again. Just make her break away from jail and that's a rap. I thought it was not very funny. It's supposed to have only one original puppy returning. I'd expected that it should be Lucky, since he was the most appealing, and besides, having Roger and Anita back too. However, they decided to have a complete recasting and adding not really one hundred, not even one hundred and two, but only THREE puppies, and a parrot that thinks he's a dog (clever). Gerard Depardieu's part was pointless. At the end, Cruella suffers way too much, way too humiliating and way too exaggerated to be true. She gets baked inside a giant cake. That was a desperate attempt of physical humor, trying to imitate the same effect from the first one. That just didn't work. It was too much over the top, and not too funny. I actually felt sorry about Cruella.

102 Dalmatians

[jboothmillard · 6/10 · 24 March 2005]

This is the sequel to the live-action version of the Disney animated film remake. Glenn Close returns as the nasty Cruella De Vil, nasty. Cruella has been rehabilitated and now adores dogs and puppies. She even treats her servant Alonzo (Tim McInnerny) like a pet. Kevin Shephard (Ioan Gruffudd) is the owner of a dog shelter called "Second Chance", he believes that Cruella can help him stop the eviction of the shelter (and that she's changed). Chloe (Alice Evans) is the only person not convinced of her change, and neither's her dalmatian Dipstick (from film one as a puppy). When Cruella hears Big Ben strike, the rehabilitation disappears and Cruella soon turns cruel again. Now that she is back to normal she has not forgotten about making a dalmatian puppy coat. She gets help from Le Pelt (Gérard Depardieu) in both kidnapping the puppies, and getting them ready to be coats. Also starring Jim Carter as Detective Armstrong and Eric Idle as the voice of Waddlesworth the parrot. It was nominated the Oscar for Best Costume Design. Good!

A review by my 10-year-old daughter...

[ottobud · 2/10 · 3 December 2000]

My 10-year-old daughter, Alexandra, writes:

I thought it was very boring, and I thought it was just a repeat of stuff from "101 Dalmatians." I couldn't wait for the movie to end. The best part was the credits at the beginning - they were cute and well done. The rest of the film is not worth watching. Thank you.

One more pup, and we've got twice the fun!!!!!

[sethn172 · 10/10 · 7 September 2006]

In 1996's "101 Dalmatians," Cruella De Vil was arrested by the London Metropolitain Police (God bless them) for attempting to steal and murder 101 puppies - dalmatians. All covered in mud and hay, she spent the next 4 years in the "tin can." Now, 4 years later, she, unfortunately, was released from the jail. I say, that's about 28 years - in dog years!!!!!

So, in 2000, Disney decided to release a sequel to the successful live-action version of the classic film and it is hereby dubbed "102 Dalmatians." In it, there is a 102nd dalmatian added to the family (Oddball is the name, I think; I should know this since this was just shown on TV recently), and the puppy had no spots!!!!! Also, while Cruella (again played by Glenn Close) has escaped again, she wanted a bigger, better coat - made once again out of the puppies!!!!!

I especially liked the theme song - I'm sure everybody loves the "Atomic Dog" song from the 70s or so. And now, we hear a bit of it in this movie!!!!!

"102 Dalmatians" is such a great film that I keep on wondering - WHEN WILL THERE BE A "103 DALMATIANS?????" LOL

10 stars

Pretty good sequel

[davispittman · 7/10 · 22 March 2015]

This was like my favorite movie when I was a kid! Cruella was my favorite Disney villain ever! There is no one better than Glenn Close to play this larger than life character!! I loved the over the top costumes, and Glenn's charisma and exuberance while playing the role! I liked all the actors, and thighs they did their job well with their role. Also, the movie is very entertaining for all ages, fun for the kids and teens and adults! Disney did a Great job in my opinion with this film! I feel like they did a good job with both 101 and 102 Dalmatians. Would've liked to maybe see roger and Anita again, but it's not like that was a heartbreaker. 7/10.

Not as much ideas (tv)

[leplatypus · 4/10 · 15 August 2012]

Maybe because it was the only name at that time, I was fed up with Disney during my childhood and it has stuck me as the best name for light, poetic and educative entertainment. Unfortunately, after each new feature I see now, I'm profoundly unhappy because the name is in fact a mirage and has lost indeed all its magic.

Those dalmatians verify this rule: Making a live movie of those pets and reuniting big names in ridiculous parts as well as nice newcomers ("mr. Fantastic", ms Evans) was seductive.

But, the recipe doesn't make it. The story is as indigestible as the final cake and the scenes drags loudly. All the energy of the cast is wasted on useless moments as nothing really essential happens. In addition, all these poor action is made intolerable with the never-ending sarcasm of a Jago clone (see the parrot of "Aladin"). The dogs are really leftover and don't do much.

Surprisingly, the movie looks cheap for a Disney as the sets looks really like a set.

So, now, you know: beware the dogs and beware the brand !

Cruella DeVil is at it again...

[MISSMOOHERSELF · 9 January 2003]

I saw the original "101 Dalmatians" 3 times while en route from England back home to the USA and I loved it. So when I saw there was a new dalmatians movie, "102 Dalmatians," I was elated and when I saw it, I was NOT disappointed. In fact, I liked this version even better than the first. Glenn Close's performance as "Ella" who has been imprisoned for 3 years for dognapping but who received behavioral modification but reverts to "Cruella" when Big Ben's chimes go off, is delightfully dastardly. And the performance by Gerard Depardieu as the loathsome LaPelt is extraordinary. But the best performances, the ones who "take the cake" are those by the Dalmatians, real or created, especially Oddball, the spotless dalmatian puppy who is obsessed with "S-P-O-T-S." The scene where she goes berserk when she sees a black and white sweater on a puppet in a Punch & Judy show is hilarious. There were scenes in which it looked like the puppies were in real danger but the magic lies in the fact that, when you read the credits, you realize those scenes were created; no puppy was ever in danger. I recommend this movie highly and I should; I've seen it at least 7 times and I also have the video.

Bow wow yippie yoo yippie.... ugh, I hate that song!

[bazmitch23 · 2/10 · 13 May 2014]

I liked this as a child. Today, not so much. That song in the opening credits is annoying. The whole joke where the parrot thinks he's a dog is not funny. The scene where the dogs are watching Lady and the Tramp and inter-cuts between that and the couple having spaghetti and meatballs made me want to vomit. Remember it was spoofed in Hot Shots 2? That scene was funny, but not this.

Also what kind of person takes their dogs to go see a puppet show? These people act like the dogs are human.

Also, when Ioan's character gets arrested, how come his dogs get arrested with him? What kind of world is this?

And as for the scene where Cruella gets baked into a cake, I'm surprised that she didn't get burnt to death in the oven.

However, I will praise Glenn's performance. She IS Cruella.

Bad in every way possible

[jonclynch · 1/10 · 22 August 2021]

Dear God, where do I begin? I knew it was a bad idea from the moment the titles started, an interminable 'song' about "digga digga dog' had me chewing my own elbows after 30 seconds. This went on for way too long while we were treated to all the credits that usually bore you at the end, accompanied by a white background and flying black spots. When this finally ended, the film start and that's when things really went downhill. Unfunny, atrocious acting, and a parrot you want to use as a shuttlecock. Avoid if you value your sanity. We lasted 20 minutes before switching off.

Did not hold up

[donovanhill27 · 4/10 · 9 March 2019]

I remember loving this film as a kid. Rewatching the film as an adult, the film does not hold up. I really remember the third act of the film before rewatching the film and it is going to be the only thing I remember. There are two fun scenes in my opinion. The ending and Cruella De Vil transformation back into her evil self. Glenn close is the only great thing from the film. This is not one you need to seek out if you have not seen it.

Inferior to the first, but not a terrible movie by all means

[TheLittleSongbird · 7/10 · 21 February 2010]

The first film was a nice one, but it is not as good as the wonderful animated classic which I found more poignant and endearing. This sequel is inferior, but not bad at all. Sure the slapstick is too much, the script has its weak spots and the plot is a tad uninspired. But the dogs are very cute here, and Eric Idle is hilarious as the macaw. The film is nice to look at with stylish cinematography and eye popping costumes(especially Cruella's), and the music is pleasant. The acting is mostly very good, Ioan Gruffudd is appealing and Gerard Depardieu while he has given better performances has fun as Cruella's accomplice. But the best asset, as it was with the first film, is the amazing Glenn Close in a deliciously over-the-top performance as Cruella, even more evil than she was previously. Overall, nice. 7/10 Bethany Cox

It has more problems than a spotted Dalmatian fur.

[filipemanuelneto · 3/10 · 11 August 2019]

"101 Dalmatians", in its 1996 live action version, was a very interesting movie that was part of my childhood. Even today, seeing that movie, I remember those times and, of course, it had one of Glenn Close's biggest performances. Unfortunately, I can't be so generous with this movie, that continued this story.

In fact, the first movie's script was so tightly closed that it was very difficult to give it continuity. The human characters, in this story, are totally distinct and do not appear in the first film, except for the great villain (who could not miss) and his servant, Alonso, always ready to be humiliated. It is up to them, and the dogs, to make the connection with the first story because, supposedly, the adult dogs of this movie were some of the puppies of the initial movie. Sound fragile? If it sounds, it is. The way Cruella is cured seems unreliable, but even more unlikely is the way she turns again who she has always been (even though that gives us one of the brightest scenes in this movie: Cruella in full transformation, hallucinating in the streets of London). Puppies are still cute, but that doesn't work as well as it did the first time, and the parrot can sometimes be truly annoying. Finally, I also felt a pace problem here: if the movie develops normally for the beginning, it accelerates sharply in the final half and runs to a sudden conclusion in a bakery.

What ultimately saves this movie are the excellent performances of Glenn Close (yet far from the impact she had on the first movie) and Gerard Depardieu, as one of Cruella's accomplices. The villain partnership turned out badly in the movie, but both actors showed excellent understanding in front of the camera. Tim McInnerny is still funny... but all the other actors can't keep up with this trio and just show up, talk and do what they have to do.

Definitely better than 5 stars

[wilsonskye14 · 7/10 · 30 May 2021]

Maybe it's because of nostalgia, but I loved this film.. Maybe even more than the first one.

I feel like adding the animal shelter adds more depth than just 100 dalmatians. I loved the chemistry between Chloe and Kevin.

It's not nearly as bad as people say. It's a fun film to sit and watch with the family.

jaw-dropping dud

[mbloxham · 2/10 · 29 May 2001]

Remember the name Kevin Lime - and please, please never let

him direct again. Timing, pacing, editing: all hopelessly wrong.

Three or four decent professionals (next time, guys, walk off the

set) can do nothing to save this film from amateurs like Alice

Evans, and the kind of production standards you'd expect from

teen-produced children's shows on british TV.

Greatest mystery: the music. A score so inept, inappropriate and

ill-matched to the tone of the film that one seriously wonders if it is

a case of sabotage. Add an acoustic that booms apparently

unengineered from a single mike, and a director who only

intermittently remembers to add auditory action offscreen, and we

have what must be on of the greatest ratio of money to result of

recent years.

An over-the-top performance by Glenn Close makes this even better than her last turn as Cruella.

[TuckMN · 9/10 · 12 December 2000]

Enormous fun for both adults and children, this film works on numerous levels: there is everything from car crashes and cake in the face to some very good (yet subtle) jokes for adults.

Glenn Close is at her sublimely evil best as Cruella (`call me Ella') De Ville.

After three years in Dr. Pavlov's Behaviour Modification Clinic she is cured of her desire for fur – even the puppy-skin fur she had so intensely desired. She even has all of her fur coats placed in the dungeon of the extraordinary castle she inhabits.

But it wouldn't be a ‘Dalmatian' movie without the subterfuge and machinations of Cruella and you know that something will change her behaviour modification. And now she needs one extra puppy (hence 102 Dalmatians) to complete her nefarious scheme this time round.

Ioan Gruffudd is instantly appealing as the hero of the film that runs the `Second Chance' dog shelter. Though he was in `Titanic' and in last year's television version (as Pip) of `Great Expectations' I didn't recognize him; well, he was ‘Fifth Officer Lowe' in `Titanic' and I didn't see `Great Expectations' so I am not terribly surprised.

Gerard Depardieu does a delightful turn as the furrier-pawn of Cruella. He prances and postures in the most outlandish and outrageous of fur clothing you have ever seen – and does it well. His 'Wicked Witch of the West' homage is hilarious.

Tim McInnerny is superb is Cruella's not-so-evil henchman – he was also ‘Alonzo,' Cruella's butler, in `101 Dalmatians' and you may also recognize him from all of the `Black Adder' Brit-Coms. He plays his usual bumbling, good-hearted, somewhat dim-witted character to great effect.

Oscars for costuming are generally given for the entirety of the costuming in a film. This is unfortunate as the clothing worn by Glenn Close is amazing – it is incredibly detailed (note her handcuffs when she is being released from the Behaviour Modification Clinic) and worthy of such an over-the-top character. Her clothing alone deserves at least an Oscar nomination.

Animation holds a special place in my heart – but comparing this film to the original animated film is like comparing apples to orangutans: it can't be done. Suffice it to say that `102 Dalmatians' is even better than the film version of `101 Dalmatians' that came out in 1996. There is a lot to like here: from the sight gags, the dialogue, and the costumes to the casting - it is a good film for the whole family.

An entertaining doggy film - with stuff for everyone!

[Mightyzebra · 7/10 · 7 December 2007]

Arguably this is a very good "sequel", better than the first live action film 101 Dalmatians. It has good dogs, good actors, good jokes and all right slapstick!

Cruella DeVil, who has had some rather major therapy, is now a lover of dogs and very kind to them. Many people, including Chloe Simon, owner of one of the dogs that Cruella once tried to kill, do not believe this is true. Others, like Kevin Shepherd (owner of 2nd Chance Dog Shelter) believe that Cruella DeVil HAS changed.

Meanwhile, Dipstick's mate, has given birth to three cute dalmatian puppies! Little Dipper, Domino and Oddball...

Starring Eric Idle as Waddlesworth (the hilarious macaw), Glenn Close as Cruella herself and Gerard Depardieu as Le Pelt (another baddie, the name should give a clue), this is a good family film with excitement and lots more!! One downfall of this film is that is has a lot of painful slapstick, but not quite as excessive as the last film. This is also funnier than the last film.

Enjoy "102 Dalmatians"! :-)

a dopey movie that didn't even bother to try

[planktonrules · 1/10 · 10 June 2005]

This movie provided NOTHING new or worthwhile. After seeing it, my wife and I both agreed that the studio simply churned this out and could have cared less if it was entertaining. This is a good example of a "concept only" film--they have a concept about a film and the other details are unimportant because execs KNOW it will make $$ just based on the initial concept.

The movie starts with Cruella getting out of prison and going on parole. She no longer hates puppies but has been programmed to adore them--she simply couldn't hurt a flea. This doesn't last too long after her release and she's back to her old ways. Period.

The most annoying aspects of the movie were the supporting characters. Eric Idle as the voice of Waddlesworth the bird made me HATE him--and that is TOUGH considering I am a die-hard Python fan. It was obvious he did this because they gave him lots of money (there can't be any other reason). Cruella's low self-esteem servant, Tim McInnerny, was funny in the Black Adder shows but here he is totally wasted and unfunny. And it must have cost a few bucks to get Gérard Depardieu but he was utterly wasted as well. There were some other supporting actors as well but given how poorly written the characters were, I am trying to block them out of my mind.

Overall, you'd be better just to let your kids watch television or even play "Grand Theft Auto" than bother letting them see this drivel.