Darkman II: The Return of Durant (1995) Reviews

• a decent sequel

  MichaelM242002-04-30

  DARKMAN II isn't as good as the first (obviously), but it's a decent sequel despite the obvious: there's no way Durant should be able to return. He was most-assuredly fried, roasted, toasted and burned all to hell at the end of the previous film, and his return is rather laughable. The story only briefly mentions that he was in a coma since that incident, and doesn't bother trying to come up with anymore more believable. They at least could have had him horribly scared or something, giving him a taste of what he did to Westlake. But still, it's fun to have him back only so we the audience that take delight in patiently waiting to see him get his at the end. He's just as vial as he was the first time around. Arnold Vosloo takes over for Liam Neeson, and it was nice watching play the hero for a change. He did a good job. Kim Delaney is rather wasted in a part that could have been much more vital to the story than it was. The film did a good job keeping up the feel of the original, despite lacking Sam Raimi's added punch. It still maintains that comic book feel, with a hidden underground lair and a hero struggling with his own inner rage while trying to stop a madman. Also nice to see the film keep the original movie's musical themes, something sequels don't often do. There's not as much action as the first one, and it's not as good as the second sequel, but as a sequel itself, it's not bad. If only a more believable explanation for Durant's return had been given.

• Surprisingly watchable sequel

  Bogey Man2002-06-12

  This first sequel to Sam Raimi's Darkman is directed by Bradford May, who worked also as a cinematographer in this film. The story begins where the first film left and there are the same characters again, but Liam Neeson is replaced by Arnold Vosloo as the Darkman/Dr. Westlake. The story is okay and not too stupid considered this is a fantasy film. The actors do fine job and no one acts stupidly. The main point in this film is to deliver action and thrills, and that it does with talent, and especially the cinematography, by the director, is very great and looks almost as fantastic as Raimi's use of camera. The scenes are often exciting, stylish and interesting, and there are only couple of usual cliches and faults which make this film pretty mediocre and worth watching for real fanatics only. But after all, this could've been MUCH worse and so I am very pleasantly surprised that May could make the film this effective and watchable. Just remember those horrible sequels like Species 2! Darkman 2 is definitely not a masterpiece or important piece of sci-fi cinema, but it works fine as a sequel and as a proof that talented directors appear also from these direct-to-video films. Hopefully May has a fine future as a film maker. 5/10 but don't watch if you prefer mainstream movies or movies that have nothing fantastic or unreal in them. This is science fiction and people who don't understand it, only waste their time by trying to watch these.

• The Battle of the Well-Spoken

  pantagruella2004-01-04

  I disagree with those films fan who feel this is a poor film. I don't feel it's over-shadowed by the original film at all. Arnold Vosloo is great. This is the man who said, "You wouldn't want to hurt my feelings, would you, Randall?" To justify his greatness in this film, he asks, "Is there a problem?" I enjoy his clear-cut voice-over. He handles the changes from toughness to concern to mad-scientist hilarity very well. I thought it was a sad move to bring back, Larry Drake, as Robert G. Durant. After all he's hardly super-powered. But still he does well as the villain. He's clever enough to counter the Dark Man a few times. His diction and delivery is very precise. He also knows how to lose his calm when losing the battle of the wits. The script is good. It's very funny. The actors work well in playing so seriously. Durant has a good gang, with most members getting some time in the spotlight. Two of the crew have the job of playing themselves and Dark Man imitating them.

• sequel

  kairingler2012-09-13

  not bad at all for a sequel,, personally i thought that it would ab solutely suck without liam neeson, well i was wrong arnold vosloo does a very credible job in this one. the storyline is very good also,, i was wondering how was darkman gonna get durant this time, in the day and age of cgi and today's movie superheroes , it's very nice to know we have darkman from the 1990's to fall back on,, it's seem like for this storyline anyway that less is more,, meaning less or no cgi is better than all of that stuff that you see today. larry drake returns as durant and is as evil as ever,, he is just such a great bad guy,, maybe not as bad as his role as the evil dentist,, but still he's a villain you sure don't wanna mess, with ,, vosloo is very credible as darkman,, so all in all a very decent sequel to watch for all.

• Not Bad For A Direct-To-Video Sequel

  breakdownthatfilm-blogspot-com2011-12-17

  It's very unfortunate that a box office success like Darkman did not have any sequels released in theatres. Heck, even RoboCop had two sequels that were theatrically released. Darkman II: The Return of Durant is quite obvious in its title about what the plot will involve. Never the less this film is not all that bad as others claim it to be. I do feel it does not match the same greatness as the first by Sam Raimi but I feel it is still a strong sequel for multiple reasons. New or old actors, all them do a good job with their characters. The story is good even though it is a little bit of retread. And it even contains some interesting dialog that was not included in the original. Playing as Darkman in this film is Arnold Vosloo, who probably at the time was not a well-known actor for anything. I will give him credit though, I think he fills Liam Neeson's shoes quite nicely. Once you get past his accent, which can take a couple minutes to get used to, the rest of the film is fine. I'll say it anyway although we know he comes back; yes, Larry Drake returns as Robert G. Durant to get his revenge on Peyton Westlake. The same goes for Darkman, who also wants to get his revenge for the final time. One thing I'm kind of upset about is that in the first film we saw Durant die. So he comes back in this film, but with all of his body intact?! And how?! None of this is ever explained. I was expecting at least a missing arm or something. Any of the other main characters from the first film are replaced with new ones. The characters of Darkman and Durant are the only two to return. Even though there are new characters in this film, all the actors do their job well so I was pleased with it. For the story of Darkman II it's a little bit of a step backward because it looks like Darkman has to kill Durant and his goons AGAIN. But to me, there was nothing truly wrong with that. This film has Westlake do some other things that are neat to watch. Of course Darkman steals their faces, its what he has going for him. Director Bradford May who is not well known for directing any other film franchise I think did a good job. He at least tries to keep much of what was left of the first movie and added into this one. Even in the screenplay there are some scenes that are different from the first film. Durant and several other characters use dialog that is funny to listen to. It's not gut busting funny but it will develop some chuckles here and there. Darkman even has some funny moments that I would not have expected to see him do because of his portrayal in the first film. Altogether this is a satisfying sequel. Darkman II: The Return of Durant is no prize package but it keeps the story of Darkman alive and moving. With good performances from the actors, this Direct-To-Video sequel is probably one of the few that actually works and sticks close to its predecessor.