But was it better than the first?
I know this was a bad movie, but was it better than the first?
www.colinandbethany.com/phpBB2/
I seriously want to know, because people saying it was a bad movie doesn't mean much to me, since I expected it not to be great. So I want to know pros and cons versus the first one. I mean, Frankie Muniz is great on Malcolm and My Dog Skip, so I just keep hoping something he puts out will be on par. Is it just the writing?
www.returnofthekingdvd.com
according to the person who's review is listed right now, it was better than the first (I think... its hard to read)
"It was great
Ok it was better than the first because they put more noticable people in it but other than that it was great. Anthony Anderson was funny in the whole playing funny act and Frankie Muniz was funny as well. Where was Hilary Duff? I did not see her in the movie but she could have been in an extra or something like that. The London filming set was great for a sequel and may I say that even though I thought the plot was funny some parts were not but I laughed a little at the not so funny parts too. On a scale of one to ten I would say probably a 9/10. Hey Frankie Muniz deserves some credit for it too. Or for some people the rating would be an A-. Ok so it was no mastermind plot but then again it was awesome. Because you can call me a movie lover. "
I hope that person is either 10 years old or from another country, because their English is horrible.