102 Dalmatians

Complete crap. A pointless, cash-grab sequel to a pointless, cash-grab remake. Would have gone straight to Disney+ these days. I hope Glenn Close got a huge paycheck for this, because damn.

The title alone is a definition of a lack of imagination. Wring every dollar out of that potential sequel Disney... shame on you.

An improvement on the 1996 "original" in terms of, well, originality, but this surprisingly over-the-top remake has none of the heart of the Disney animated classic.

Horrid trash with one glaring exception. Glenn Close.

Glenn Close continues good like Cruella De Vil. But the rest is a bad movie, even for children.

Meaningless!

ok kids flick

Jeepers.

Gets a pass for the bizarre humiliation dolled out to Cruella (and Close’s obvious enjoyment of it), but this is otherwise a ho-hum, unnecessary follow-up, playing more as a rehash once Cruella "hears the bells" and reverts to true form. Gruffudd and Evans are so barely there that they make Daniels and Richardson before them seem positively aggressive; revs up satisfactorily towards the finale, with seasoned pros Close, Depardieu and McInnerny clearly enjoying themselves. DIGGA DIGGA DOG!!

Repulsively cute and only partially amusing. Close and Depardieu are fantastic.

Tiring sequel. They might have gotten more mileage out of the Cruella character if she changed in some way or had a different plan to the first movie. The costumes in this film were one of the only highlights. Ioan Gruffudd and Alice Evans seem like actors from a neighbouring rom-com who were dragged off set and blackmailed into participating in some dog-related hijinks. Also, 102 is excessive. I would've been happy with just 4 or 5 Dalmatians in this film. Would kids watch this more than once?

Awful cash-in sequel with unnecessary addition of talking animals

I love Glen Close's acting though. She's the perfect Cruella.

Fuck Eric Idle

Cured:P+treatmentwearsoff+getshermoneyifbadsoframeshim+CDturnedintocake

I didn't particularly care for the original movie, so I kind of knew what I was getting into with this. And I pretty much got what I expected. Glenn Close was alright, but she had to have known she was going to be in a bad movie. And this was a bad movie. The dogs were kind of cute, but at times they were overdoing this with the way the dogs handled things. Like a dog running a VCR. I don't think so. Even in a fantasy world, I don't think so. Not even cute.

What's with the albine puppy?? WTF

I really like as in the 1996 version Glenn Close's performance. The rest is just a kids flick.

I didn't realize that 101 Dalmatians needed the gimmick of a dog that hadn't gotten it's spots yet.

"Rollicking good fun! Superior to the first live-action movie, with the humans given more to do and a pace that never lets up. A treat for dog-lovers and family audiences alike."

Glenn Close is as great as ever, but why watch this movie when one could watch the first and better one?

"Ella? There is no 'Ella'. There is only CRUella! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA"

don't be doing things like that

Why does this thing exist?

Stupid stupid stupid. Even for a soulless Disney movie this is a travesty.

Embarrassing.

Pointless, cash-in sequel. This story had nothing more to offer.

This is the one where Glenn Close is forcibly turned into a cake.

a cute dog movie

Its endlessly cute and lighthearted for sure. But 102 Dalmatians gives Glenn Close a real chance to shine in an even more over-the-top performance than the previous one. Which on its own merits makes this film well worth a watch.

This sequel to the live-action 101 Dalmatians is simply more of the same. Critics say it also drags in parts, potentially boring children, and that it's too violent for a G-rated movie.

I seriously wonder why Glenn Close did this movie. Gerard Depardieu hasn't had a good movie in the States in years, so I can understand him being in it. Once again, the puppies are cute and the hijinks are frantic. Either way though, it's not enough to salvage this movie. Cool Happy Meal toys though.