Incannerax What a waste of my time!!!

Peereddi I was totally surprised at how great this film.You could feel your paranoia rise as the film went on and as you gradually learned the details of the real situation.

SeeQuant Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

Aspen Orson There is definitely an excellent idea hidden in the background of the film. Unfortunately, it's difficult to find it.

david-sarkies Unfortunately I'm not able to compare this to the original because, well, I haven't seen the original, only the remake. Unfortunately I'm not able to compare it to the remake because, well, that probably wouldn't be all that fair, or appropriate. Anyway, it is a film made in the early 80s, so there is going to be quite a few differences, not counting the special effects. Actually, come to think of it, until the remake was released, I never really thought all that much of these films, and certainly didn't go our of my way to watch them. However, I've decided to at least give some of them a go, just to see what they are like. Anyway, the film is set five years after the first one, and Paul Kersey finds himself in Los Angeles, having moved there after his girlfriend takes up a job at a local radio station. His daughter seems better, and things seem to be going well, that is until pretty much the same thing happens that happened in New York. Not surprisingly, he decides not to help the police, and goes out and takes matters into his own hands. Unlike the first film, in this one he does go out to hunt down the perpetrators of the crime. This film certainly shows its age, and in fact I suspect that what happens here simply would not be tolerated in a more modern sense. For instance there are a couple of rape scenes, and they are pretty explicit. In fact these scenes seemed to go pretty overboard to the point that it is almost bordering on the exploitation of women. In a way scenes like these simply would not be tolerated in modern cinema, and in fact I can't recall any such scenes in any of the films that I've seen in a while. It turned out that I didn't really mind this film all that much, and it did actually keep me interested. Still, it wasn't something that stood out all that much, and it is a shame that I haven't had the opportunity to see the first one yet. However, other than some rather explicit scenes (which these days seems to be replaced by excessive gore), this film was okay. However, unlike the first one, it did have a bit more of a plot, and while once again Kersey manages to get away with murder, things don't always go quite his way, particularly at the end.

trashgang The follow up to the cult classic from 1974. Charles Bronson picks up again the role of Paul Kersey, the vigilante who goes out killing the ones who damaged his family and this time it even goes a bit further, his daughter got killed.Is it as good as the original, no it isn't but it's still worth picking up because you can see Los Angeles back in the eighties. Not only that, Laurence Fishburne is to spot as the cutter, just before he got his big roles. It's a bit more violent then the 1974 flick but being made in the heydays of gore it's in fact low on that part. And it takes a while before the revenge comes in. You have to see the original Death Wish to understand a few things with the cops. Gore 1/5 Nudity 0,5/5 Effects 2/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5

Jamesfilmfan905 Death wish 2 is the crass disgusting vulgar exploitive piece of 80s trash which has more plot holes than your average children's book anyway the story once again stars Charles Bronson as Paul kersey who has moved to los Angeles to try and get his act together and move on from the events of the first film he goes to pick up his now sane daughter carol who has recovered from the injury's she suffered in the first film from the attempted rape by the 3 disgusting perversely warped monsters that were led by jeff goldblum that were never caught by the police or Bronson after getting away with such a sick crime on both the daughter and mother who died from her injury's . Anyway the film really outdid itself in a particularly gruesome scene in which three new thugs break it Bronson's house physically assault then rape the maid this scene does not belong in any sort of film no matter what Michael winner should have been ashamed of himself for making such a piece of s***t . The only reason it gets a 2 from me is Bronson's serviceable if a little amateurish performance and the action scenes but apart from that a thoroughly disgusting film to an effective original 1974 flick that was effective in its own way .

jimbo-53-186511 Paul Kersey (Charles Bronson)has moved from New York City to Los Angeles as a means of starting over again. His daughter has been released from hospital, although she's still in a semi-catatonic state. Kersey has a new love interest and a housekeeper and everything seems to be going OK for Kersey. However, when Kersey's wallet becomes stolen after he's been mugged, the gang find address confirmation in Kersey's wallet and proceed to Kersey's home where they kill his housekeeper and kidnap his daughter and then kill her. Following these events, Kersey goes back to his old ways and sets about tracking down the gang of muggers.I think what I liked about Death Wish 2 is the fact that it is more focused than the first film. The narrative in the first film was shaky to say the least and I found that the events in the second half never really connected with what had happened in the first half - he killed lots of would be muggers, but never seemed to pursue those that perpetrated the original crime against his wife and daughter which never made any sense to me. Thankfully, with this film it's much more straight forward - Kersey goes after the muggers that killed his wife and daughter and that's all there is to this film and it's this straight forward and focused plot that makes this a stronger film. Like the first film, it's quite graphic and brutal, but again this does give the film a very realistic feel to it. As a direct result of the stronger narrative it ultimately means that the film flows much better and it never really gets to a point where it becomes boring.The only real glaring weakness I could find with this film lay with Jill Ireland; I felt that her acting was a bit wooden and her character was probably one of the most bland characters that I've ever seen. I also never really bought into their romance either. Thankfully, her character and their romance don't make that much of an impact on the film and Winner mostly just allows Bronson to do his 'thing' which was perfectly OK with me.One final thing I'll say about this sequel is don't be put off by its current rating of 5.9. It's an underrated sequel which is much better than its rating suggests. If you liked the first film then you will like this film. As for me, I preferred it to the first film, but I know I'm in the minority on that one.