Agent Cody Banks 2: Destination London | | Cast : | Frankie Muniz, Anthony Anderson, Hannah Spearritt | | Director : | Kevin Allen | | Studio : | Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer | | Format : | Color, Closed-captioned, Widescreen | | Released Date : | March 12, 2004 | | DVD Released Date : | October , 2004 | | Language : | Spanish (Dubbed), French (Subtitled), English (Subtitled), Cantonese Chinese (Subtitled), English (Original Language), French (Original Language), Spanish (Subtitled) | | Audience Rating : | PG (Parental Guidance Suggested) | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON |
Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | July 26, 2005 | | Summary | Destination: LONDON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | Content
 | My family and I saw this movie in the theater in March of 2004. While they liked the first one much better, I actually liked this one! Yes, it's not just more England-friendly (the last one was rated '12' [PG-13 here] over in the UK, but this was rated 'PG' in the UK, without cuts), but it takes place in the greatest place in the universe...LONDON!!!!!!!!!!!! Even in that part where Banks and his big friend were standing below the north end of the Millenium Bridge (I've actually stood there!!!!!!!!!!!), I recognized that Kenworth Industries building: IT'S THE TATE MODERN MUSEUM! (I've been in there, too!) Oh, I only wish I could see this movie again! Especially on DVD, too!
God Bless Britain - the union jack's colours will never bleed! |
| Rating | | | Date | July 16, 2005 | | Summary | Great Sequel | Content
| This movie is one sequel to a great movie. I thought it would be very difficult to make a movie as good as the first, but they did. Destination London has a good number of differences from the first film, however, the film worked out fine. This movie has some great scenes from beginning to end. On top of that, the action is great and beliveable.
Other than the movie, the special features are spectacular. You should deffinetally watch the "Interactive Quiz" and new "Visual Commentary," a totally new kind of commentary. I strongly recommend this movie, and I hope you like it as much as did. |
| Rating | | | Date | July 11, 2005 | | Summary | A Big Disapointment | Content
| After loving the first film I saw this terrible sequel. Relizing the potintial of a series I was exited about this movie. Good thing I did not pay money for this! From minute one it was bad, bad cast, bad charectors, bad Bad Guys,and bad story(How many times has mind control been done). Avoid this sequal. |
| Rating | | | Date | July 07, 2005 | | Summary | Totally Unnecessary and Uninspired Sequel | Content
| I liked the idea of the half-pint James Bond-like secret agent played by Frankie Muniz aka 'Agent Cody Banks.' The story is not exceptionally original, but Muniz, a decent actor I suppose, carried the whole film pretty well, which was enjoyable to see.
Now, finally I saw the sequel, which turned out a big disappointment. First, you realize that everything is missing from the sequel, I mean, everything that made the original film quite a unique one. Here, 'Cody' is no longer timid or feels intimidated before women; he just acts like an ordinary American teenager, but this time he is in London! That's all, and Cody is assigned a job to retrieve the high-tech mind-control device that might be used to control the world's leaders at G7 (or G8 ... whatever). But ... why do they need special agent Cody instead of ordinary spy like James Bond or any spies you can name?
Because Cody has to get close to the prime suspect, who owns a boarding school, where Cody must be placed. And for the successful mission, Cody must not disclose his identity before the kids (who wouldn't believe such nonsense anyway). My question: Do you believe in this poorly written plot, or, more to the point, DO you care?
If you should care, that's because of romance. In the sequel, you see no Hilary Duff, who was not bad in the first film. Instead, you get Hannah Spearritt (ex 'S-Club'), but between Muniz and her there is no chemistry. Add to that, the gadgets are unimaginative ones; the locations are all shot like post-cards. Side kick Anthony Anderson is same old Anthony Anderson, who is certainly funny, but we know he could be much more funny with better materials, better than doing unfunny slapsticks in the kitchen.
I read that the film's script was being written during the shooting. What were they thinking? Did director Kevin Allen approve that? Did MGM need the sequel that desperately? Or quickly? Because Frankie Muniz was reaching the age of 20, no longer a 'teenager,' no 'Cody Banks'? I don't know, but I'm pretty sure that as far as the script is concerned, the film is a very lazy, unfunny, unexciting comedy of which sole merit is that it was shot in London. But sooner or later you can see London in another film. |
| Rating | | | Date | April 27, 2005 | | Summary | Destination ... nowhere! | Content
| I will admit, I was a fan of the first film. While I didn't think it was one of the greatest films created, I did think that it had quite a bit of potential coupled with ample originality. It was fun, exciting, and it seemed like everyone involved seemed to be enjoying themselves. I only with that I could say the same for the sequel, Agent Cody Banks: Destination London. From the opening sequence of this film you could sense an aura of dislike, repetitiveness, and simple futility. Nobody, not even Frankie Muniz himself, seemed like they were bringing the same level of excitement to this project. Also, the level of originality was completely below par for this sequel. If you, like myself, brought any excitement from the first film to this one, it will be completely destroyed. Nothing worked in this movie, from the jokes, to the "spy" story, it just seemed flat and disrespectful.
My first issue is with the cast. If this was a true sequel, I think the producers could have budgeted a bit more to see about getting the original characters back. I understand that perhaps Hillary Duff's paycheck had risen since the original film, but she did bring something (as embarrassing as it is to say) to Agent Cody Banks that kept the spark alive. As did everyone else involved, sadly, Anthony Anderson (one of the most overused comic actors of this decade) brought nothing to the table. His jokes seemed generic and, honestly, repetitive. He had no character, all I could witness was Anthony Anderson being Anthony Anderson. They attempted to bring sympathy to his character by giving him this sub-story about being the "black" sheep of the CIA, but in my eyes it just wasn't enough. Anderson was just trying to showcase his "talent" so that he can continue to live the lifestyle that he has built. It was sad, and really hurt this film. Second, was Muniz himself. The bond between him and Hannah Spearritt was poor. I am not sure who the casting agent was on this project, but there was no chemistry between these two actors. They continued to prove that by reading your lines and walking the steps, you could inherit a $5 million dollar paycheck. Nobody cared, nobody stopped, they just continued to make this cheapened sequel.
Next issue, where was the story? The first film carried with it some decent events that built a strong story which ultimately lead to a better than average film, but it seemed like in this sequel they aimed towards children and empty minds. In most film sequels, they use a similar plot structure to give the audience a sensation of relaxation, while simultaneously building different elements to keep our attention. Well, none of that was used in this film. Instead, we find ourselves with a cheapened story that results in dogs playing piano and a very unspooky villain. In fact, I couldn't even tell you who the true bad guy was of this film, and that is a perfect sign that your film is struggling. This story just felt as if it was unfinished, as if the original screenplay was not dumbened down for children, but instead built another strong adventure, but the studio wanted to capture the child audience, so the butchered the product, leaving frayed edges and unfinished segments, so that they could make room for Anthony Anderson's cheap laughs. Yet again, proving the pathetic nature of the film. I went into this story expecting to be completely surprised, yet somehow walked away without any recollection of what I just experienced. It was the perfect example of a how a sequel should not be structured or released.
Finally, I would like to say that if you have a film that seems to do somewhat well at the box office, there should be no need to rush right into a sequel, especially if you see a growing decrease in the excitement behind Malcolm in the Middle. Frankie Muniz is a decent actor, but when handed poor material, he will not fray from making it exceptionally poor. He is one of those actors that brings good things to great material, but will falter if handed unseasonable stuff. I do not see a bright future for Muniz due to his ability to stray from decency. This could have been a powerful sequel, but instead Hollywood yet again strayed towards the side of childish behavior instead of truthful storytelling.
Overall, this film lacked the fun of the first film. With unfamiliar characters, comedy that seemed forced and incoherent instead of funny, and a story that had that cheapened Velcro feel to it, Agent Cody Banks 2 proved that jumping to quickly into a sequel will place a black cloud on your entire series. While once I had considered this to be an interesting and highly original concept, I now have second thoughts. I am not sure that Muniz was prepared for such a cheap sequel, and therefore he signed too quickly. I do not recommend this film to anyone that enjoyed the first film, or at least was under the impression that the first film was decent. This was a horrible sequel that should have never seen the light of day. YUK!
Grade: * out of ***** |
|
