All critic scores are converted to a 100-point scale. If a critic does not indicate a score, we assign a score based on the general impression given by the text of the review. Learn more...

Average User Score: 5 (15 sources)

Submit Movie Review

Review this film

Tell the world what you think of Basic Instinct 2

Your Score:

reset score

Write Your Review:
When writing your review, remember to keep the language clean.

Submit Review Cancel

prinzofpersia

-1

Agree (0)

Disagree (0)

bad,bad,BAD FILM!!!

Report Abuse

Posted sep 14, 2007 4:37 pm pt

jackboom

-1

Agree (0)

Disagree (0)

First off, let me just say that I enjoyed the original film very much and although it wasn't a cinema classic I still consider it to be a sleazy yet sexy film. So with that out of the way, I advise you to avoid the plague that is Basic Instinct...
[+] Read Full Review

First off, let me just say that I enjoyed the original film very much and although it wasn't a cinema classic I still consider it to be a sleazy yet sexy film. So with that out of the way, I advise you to avoid the plague that is Basic Instinct 2.

Sharon Stone is back to reprise her role in the first film and was probably the only redeeming thing in the film although there were moments where she had bad acting, pretty much where she was talkin dirty because it sounded very forced, hey at least she still looks good for a 48 year old. The dood that took over for Michael Douglas I guess was not so good, very wooden and the man had no chemistry with Stone. Not only that, the movie had some of the worst dialogue I've ever heard in a film and I've seen a lot of really **** movies. The plot was full of holes the size of Rosie O'Donnell, it just made me go HUH???!!! Very outlandish and ridiculous as it approaches the finale especially. For those expecting a lot of nudity, you'll probably have to wait for DVD because there was surprisingly not a lot of it compared to the first movie, sorry fellas. Although I found most of the film very funny because of everything I've mentioned above (the audience I watched it with laughed quite a bit as well), it sadly is not a comedy and tries very hard to be a serious thriller. This movie should not have been made to begin with and is 14 years too late, easily on my shit list of 2006 and beyond...I rather watch Beautician and the Beast over this big pile of turd. Avoid at all costs...(unless your curious how bad it is, download it and save your $)!

I give it 1 out of 5...
only because of Sharon Stone and I'm being nice to.

[-] Minimize Review

Report Abuse

Posted mar 14, 2007 11:22 am pt

• [+] Entertainment Weekly
  
  67
  by Owen Gleiberman | Read Full Review »
• [+] New York Daily News
  
  63
  by Jack Mathews | Read Full Review »
• [+] Variety
  
  50
  by Dennis Harvey | Read Full Review »
• [+] Christian Science Monitor
  
  50
  by Peter Rainer | Read Full Review »
• [+] Chicago Reader
  
  50
  by Jonathan Rosenbaum | Read Full Review »
• [+] Baltimore Sun
  
  42
  by Chris Kaltenbach | Read Full Review »
• [+] Portland Oregonian
  
  42
  by M. E. Russell | Read Full Review »
• [+] Salon.com
  
  40
  by Stephanie Zacharek | Read Full Review »
• [+] Film Threat
  
  40
  by Stina Chyn | Read Full Review »
• [+] The Hollywood Reporter
  
  40
  by Kirk Honeycutt | Read Full Review »
• [+] LA Weekly
  
  40
  by Ella Taylor | Read Full Review »
• [+] Chicago Tribune
  
  38
  by Michael Phillips | Read Full Review »
• [+] Philadelphia Inquirer
  
  38
  by Steven Rea | Read Full Review »
• [+] The Globe and Mail (Toronto)
  
  38
  by Rick Groen | Read Full Review »
• [+] TV Guide
  
  38
  by Maitland McDonagh | Read Full Review »