Darkman II: The Return of Durant (1995)

Wonderful Movie

Why so much hype?

Pretty Good

Boring

It's more of the same from the Renaissance stable, except where the first film had a unique visual style and ferocity thanks to director Sam Raimi, a journeyman director brings nothing new to this movie and only succeeds in ripping off his predecessor. The story has been changed to make way for new characters here but it's still the same hijinks with Darkman disguising himself and infiltrating the enemy camp just as he has done previously. They even throw in a scientist torture scene almost exactly the same as the one in the original.Liam Neeson had become too big a star for a low budget movie like this in the four years since the first film, so the lead role was taken by Arnold Vosloo, who had already made an impact as the villainous henchman in Van Damme's excellent HARD TARGET. To be fair, I've always liked Vosloo in his films, even if his acting ability is somewhat limited. The only problem is that he doesn't bring much in the way of freshness to the role, instead happily copying Neeson's performance in every possible way. Larry Drake also returns from the first one as the film's villain and gives a great, hissably evil pantomime performance with lots of one liners in his own inimitable style, and he's the best thing in this film. I just wish they could explain how he escaped from inside an exploding helicopter with only a few scars.As for Drake's henchmen, they don't have personalities and are just there to look cool and imposing, which they do. Some of the performers show a surprising comic touch but nobody really shines. Female interest comes from the familiar Kim Delaney, as a cocky reporter, and Renee O'Connor, better known these days as Gabrielle from XENA: WARRIOR PRINCESS. It's interesting to watch O'Connor in a different role but you quickly realise why she has been relegated to just one television series instead of becoming a major star: she's an actress just impossible to take seriously! There are enough explosions, fights, shoot-outs and basic plot intrigue to make this watchable, but in all it's a bit of a mess. If only they had added to Darkman's character instead of giving him a few one-liners to convey his suffering which are just variations on Neeson's script. We don't learn anything new about any of the characters at all here, we just watch their actions, there's no depth which at least the original had. By all accounts the third film in this series is even worse, so it's probably best give that one a miss as well. This is a passable but disappointing film which just comes across as a slapdash rehash of the superior DARKMAN more than anything else.

I know that many viewers will disagree with me, but I think Darkman II is a slight improvement from the first. Darkman may have been a more original story, but this film offers more energy and quirky fun. Rather than being kind of Abstract like Raimi was, this story at it's core falls back to an archetypal principle of super heroism, Person vs. Person conflict, good verses evil. The movie which results is not a great one but it's a neat watch.In the first movie, Dr. Westlake defeated his enemy; Crime lord, Robert G. Durant...or did he? Leaving his past behind him, Peyton went off to face the world alone, and that is how the first movie ended. Living in his new hideout deep in the bowels of the subway system, Dr. Westlake continues his research to figure out a way to permanently repair his face. His current formula can only only last him 97 minutes. One day he reads a newspaper article about a rogue scientist who is doing some similar studies. After meeting with him they decide to become partners. This other guy has an office in a vacant building which used to belong to his father, therefore it has sentimental value for him. This old factory has not gone unnoticed by Durant, who has recently woken up from the coma that Westlake put him in. Durant is ready to go back into the weapons dealing business, and he wants to base his operation in this vacant factory. He has his goons bump off the young scientist, spoiling Peyton's hope for a partnership. And that makes him mad. He must fight Durant once more.Replacing Liam Neeson in Westlake's shoes is Arnold Vosloo, (who many will recognize from The Mummy). He is not a skilled actor, but he manages okay here. It is Durant who has the bigger screen presence. He is played with a certain quirkiness to go with his two- dimensional villainous persona.Although hardy an example of good-filmaking, it should not be so quickly dismissed just because it is a strait to video release. If you were not satisfied with what you saw in Darkman, you might find a little more in this one.

Sam Raimi created Darkman with a potential franchise in mind, and his original movie had enough flair to suggest a sequel was warranted. Unfortunately (or perhaps wisely--for Raimi), he handed over the straight-to-video sequel duties to rookie director Bradford May, and nobody bothered to come up with much of a screenplay. As a result, Darkman II plays like a bad pilot for a proposed Darkman TV series, with Arnold Vosloo (best known as a villain in Jean-Claude Van Damme's Hard Target) doing his best to replace Liam Neeson in the title role. Sporting a dastardly scar and delivering lackluster punch lines as he kills his many enemies, Larry Drake returns from the first film as the villainous Durant, who wreaks havoc in his attempt to finance and manufacture the world's most destructive automatic weapons. As he supports the synthetic skin experiments of a like-minded scientist, the scarred hero known as Darkman thwarts Durant's ruthless plot, but the case proves costly for the intrepid crime reporter (Kim Delaney, Pr-NYPD Blue) who allies herself with Darkman's efforts. Basically, this by-the-numbers plot serves as a tissue-thin vehicle for lots of explosions and gratuitous violence, and it's all about as inspired as a bad syndicated action show. Of interest only to those who were dazzled by the original Darkman, and even then it's a disappointment.

I really like the original Darkman so I was skeptical as to whether this would be a good sequel or not, but I was impressed. Like the first one, it's in no way a groundbreaking film but it is a good slice of entertainment. I think anyone who liked the first film will like this movie as well.Arnold Vosloo does an exceptional job taking over Liam Neeson's character and I'd go as far as to say that he is just as good. The story is alright but it kind of seems like a repeat of the original, I guess there's only so much you can do with these movies. I really like the effects as well. This one was fun.Give Darkman II a viewing if you enjoyed the first one and like some cheesy action. As long as you don't expect a sweeping epic, I think you'll have some fun.