MUY MEHHHHHHHH, El diseño de los perros es muy malo y también el remake no necesitaba secuela, su título no tiene sentido de 102 DALMATAS deberían llamarla 202 DALMATAS, pero aun así la película es disfrutable.

The first was no classic. This is worse.

This movie reminds me of the straight to video disney sequels. Boring.

Although Glenn Close's performance is once again the main standout throughout the film's run time, everything else was very dull and boring.

The only thing I remember about '102 Dalmatians' is the climax in which Cruella DeVil is baked into a cake. The film is literally worth watching just for that scene.

#BringBackFridaDalmatian

Disney's "102 Dalmatians" is a mixed bag of cinematic treats and missed opportunities. While it retains the adorable charm of its predecessor, the film struggles to recapture the magic that made the original so beloved. The performances from Glenn Close as the iconic Cruella de Vil and the lovable Dalmatians themselves are undeniably entertaining, but the storyline feels disjointed and lacks the cleverness of the first film. Additionally, the humor falls flat at times, and the plot veers into predictability. Nevertheless, the movie still offers a fun and visually appealing experience for younger audiences, even if it falls short of living up to the brilliance of its predecessor.

I can understand why the critics really don't like this one. The biggest issue is that it's basically a rehash of the first movie. Cruella wants to kill puppies for a coat. I think they were going for a Freddy Krugger style bad guy but it just doesn't work. Plus the new side characters in this is kind of annoying. But just because I sorta agree with the critics reason for hating this doesn't mean I hate it. True, it's just the same story reheated in the microwave of a mind control subplot but it has some charm and it is funny. It's a rehash but sometimes leftover hash can be tasty. And this is a entertaining rehash. Flawed but a fun watch.

Glenn Close returns as Cruella de Vil and refosters her love of puppy furs in this sequel to the live action remake. I think Glenn Close earned this movie with her performance in the first movie. However for the first third of this movie she is hampered by the script to fully bring out the same character. None of the other characters return from the first film besides Close and this creates a disconnect between the antagonist and protagonists until Cruella personally affects them about halfway through the movie. Alice Evans plays Cruella's parole officer who also happens to own one of the puppies from the first movie that is now grown up with his own litter of dalmatian pups. This movie doesn't do a great job displaying character from the animals as the first did. I think most of that comes from an increase in the number of animal characters and the lack of time to get to know any of them. The finale in this movie is really lame, but may get a few laughs out of the younger kids. If you liked the first live action remake, you may like this one.

I have no idea why this movie even exists. The dog-napping element is reused again, so there is little to no originality. The main characters from the original are taken away and we are just left with Cruella De Vil doing the same things she did in the 1996 version.

This is one of those movies that stay in your memory as better than they actually are.

The worst Disney remake in the live-action world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is an underrated gem. A slight improvement from the mess that is the 1st film. This film makes Cruella the main focus of the film, as opposed to the puppies. I think the director knew that people only watched the 1st one because of the Cruella character. What brings this film down was (again) the lack of chemistry between the two leads, as well as a few nonsensical moments (for example; who brings their puppies to the office with them). Also the female lead (the probation officer) in this film is extremely dislike-able. She's been tasked to be Cruella's probation officer, yet she hates her before she even has a full on conversation with her, that is extremely unprofessional. Also she doesn't believe in "2nd chances" - yet she works as a "probation officer"?? (Just another nonsensical thing in this film that doesn't make sense). The 2 villains on the other hand, are great! Glen Close and that other guy (the French guy) are just having an absolute blast with their roles and it truly shows and pays off (Because it works!). If it weren't for them, this entire film would just collapse. My verdict 1 star. But I'll give an extra 2 stars just for the 2 villains (who actually make this film work). Final verdict 3 stars.

Glenn Close has done it again!

yea it has it's cute moments, but this movie is way too deep, graphic, and even violent for kids.

This movie was bad when it came out and is still bad today. Your kids will like it, that's about it.

Not as good as the first one from 1996 but glenn close is still amazing

Contre toute attente, il y a quelques idées plutôt originales dans les 102 Dalmatiens, donc une séquence absolument improbable de montage alterné sous fond de la Belle et le Clochard qui oscille entre le mignon et le totalement ridicule. Le film de Kevin Lima ressemble fortement à cette séquence. Il y a beaucoup d'idées, bonnes ou mauvaises et Lima les tente toutes, bien aidé par une production design singulière. Pour un Gérard Depardieu réjouissant en roue libre, on doit supporter un duo de leads particulièrement fades. Evidemment, c'est bien trop long pour son propre bien et ça se transforme en clone de Home Alone dans le troisième acte, mais c'est un progrès considérable comparé au premier épisode. Ce qui n'est pas dire grand-chose.

Sequelitis in a nutshell.

Despite scene-stealing performances from Glenn Close and Gerard Depardieu, 102 Dalmatians has problems that are much more obvious here than in the first film. There is a fair bit of padding, the messages are a bit iffy and it can't quite make its mind on its tone. When you see the title, you obviously expect cute puppy antics and Cruella De Vil getting the well-deserved short end of the stick but the movie goes from cheesy, boring romance to rather dark, violent moments even if they're played for laughs. Also, the parrot sucks. For two movies whose major difference is that the dogs don't talk, this goes against the main selling point(?) of the first film and probably just Disney cashing in on that Paulie movie from two years ago. Remember that? Sorry, but getting nominated for an Academy Award for Best Costume Design and having two enjoyable Large Ham performances do not a good movie make. In terms of "live-action remake" sequels, stick with Alice Through The Looking Glass. Surely, even Maleficent: Mistress of Evil will be better than this despite being from one of the directors of the 5th, and worst, Pirates of the Caribbean movie.