Benutzerrezensionen

O.K. I do admit that the movie is beyond bad, but I have to say that Peter Frechette (a.k.a. Louis DiMucci) was adorable! He has a pretty good singing voice as well. Plus I think the "Let's do it for our Country" song is hilarious. He was the best actor in that movie. Even more believable than Michelle Pfeiffer. I give it a 6 because of him.

This film clearly took notes of the criticism of the original. The film does not make you wonder of the age of the cast. A lot of them are more youthful looking or they at least does not feel like as old as a your parents. They also made the film's Sandy (played by Pfeiffer) more intuitive and generally less emotive.

But that's pretty much were the success of the film ends.

Sadly the film fails in one aspect that really made the original successful, the music.

Leaving the music behind, the original is not really a noteworthy film, in hindsight. Grease's story is just enough fluff and edge but it is not something to write about. But original's musical core really pushes it into another territory.

In Grease 2, the story pretty much drives the film. Its kind of awkward actually seeing some of the music, because it feels unprompted (ie the Cool Rider scene) and sometimes too out of the blue. It's a distraction. In addition, the music is too wordy for its own good. None of the song registered compared to the original, which I also barely knew before watching but does remember at least five by the end.

Overall, the film is okay but more so as an appreciation of the story unlike the original, which is an appreciation for the songs.[3/5]

PS: The film has a weird obsession with the male lead played by Caulfield. There is a lot of "glamor" shots of him inserted for reaction shots. I know that he is REALLY HOT and I guess, the studio was banking for him as the next big star but really movie?

You know, Grease 2 has taken a lot of flack & extensive bad reviews for not living up to the original. I really don't think that is to fair considering the cast was totally different. Granted there was no super-star-pop-icon like Olivia Newton-John. There wasn't the hot-70's & 80's actor John Travolta. However, there were some great stars in this film. The writing may have been a little less than perfect...the direction might not have been up to par. But for me, being EXTREMLY young when both Grease 1 & 2 came out, I never compared the two. I think they are two different films with the same "type" of concept. The music was good. The dance scenes are good. & yes, even the story is okay. Grease mania is about being a devoted fan... that is something I am. I liked both of these films on two different levels. Grease without a doubt is the better of the two. But this one is not as bad as the negativity everyone feeds into it. If see one, see the other. Just note that they are both FUN movies! Nothing more. The sequel centers around Sandy's cousin Michael. He is in love with Stephanie, & trys EVERYTHING possible to win her over. The Pink Ladies are still cooler than ever. The T-Birds are not as tuff, but are sexy! 1-10 Grease(10) Grease2(8) Z.

I think most people are accustomed to sequels that are not as good as the originals. There are exceptions of course, such as the Godfather, Lethal Weapon, etc. which had some great follow-ups. Rarely are there sequels as bad as this one is however. It is a perfectly awful movie.

I hate it when film makers try to capitalize on a movie as successful as "Grease" by trying to foist junk like this off on the public as a follow-up. The sequel doesn't have the same director, writers or major cast members of the original movie and it shows!

There *are* some decent cast carry-overs from the original movie but they are wasted (as is just about everything else about this movie). I'm sure they must have later regretted lending their considerable names to this disaster.

I have rarely heard so many forgettable (read: terrible) songs in one movie. Don't waste your time on this one. Stick with the original. It's incomparably better.

Boy-girl love affair/sequel with songs, only this time she's the punkette and he's the straight arrow. Movie-buffs out there actually like this movie? It has fans? I must say, the mind reels... "Grease 2" is a truly lame enterprise that doesn't even have the courage, moxy or sheer gall to take the memory of its predecessor down in flames (like "Jaws 2" or "Exorcist II"). No, it whimpers along in slow-motion and often just plays dead. It looks and feels cheap, with a large cast lost amidst messy direction and unfocused handling. This was the first time a substantial audience got a glimpse of Michelle Pfeiffer and, although she doesn't embarrass herself, it's a role worth forgetting. A misfire on the lowest of levels. NO STARS from ****

This is an evil sequel. Very misled, the cast is increadibly unbelievable, the songs are bad, the choreography weak. The film has such low production values, I would bet the food on set tasted no so great.

However it does not deserve its position, it should be a little bit lower nearer the single digits.

Please do not spoil Grease by watching this film, if you have yet to do so!

This film to me is not that bad, most the people who have seen it compare it to the original. What I reckon is that if this was just a film and not a sequel to Grease it would probably be appreciated more.

In my opinion I like Grease 2 better, I actually found Grease to be quite boring, but hey that's just me. In Grease 2 I like the songs better and the guys are much more better looking than the first one.

Overall this movie for me is quite entertaining and I like it, and I certainly do not compare it to the first one as it is a whole new different movie and storyline.

So if you haven't seen Grease 2 before because people say it's crap and that it's a waste of time, at least give it a chance and watch it, it might surprise you.

GREASE 2 is right down there with XANADU and ROLLER BOOGIE as one of the worst music related movies to slither across theater screens in the early 80s.

Sandy's cousin (Maxwell Caufield, who's English, even though she was Australian... well I suppose they still could have been cousins) comes to Rydell High and immediately finds himself a target for the bullying of the T-Birds (led by Adrian Zmed, who gives the movie's best performance... yikes). He eventually wins over the leader of the Pink Ladies (Michelle Pfeiffer, right before SCARFACE) by posing as a mysterious biker who takes on the entire rival motorcycle gang.

A couple of catchy songs ("Back to School" and "Reproduction" are both fun) cannot compete with a moronic screenplay (by the same guy who wrote and directed AIRPLANE II), dreadful performances and some abysmal songs (particularly "Let's Score Tonight," "Who's That Guy" and "Cool Rider").

Pretty much an embarrassment for everyone involved, especially such wasted talent as Connie Stevens, Eve Arden and Sid Caesar. Tab Hunter fares the best out of the guest stars as a nervous substitute teacher.

The movie has developed a loyal cult following. Then again, so has Charles Manson.

This is a good follow-up to the 1978 movie "Grease". Although it has gotten some bad reviews over the years, I still think the movie is a good comedy musical and it is just as much of a swooning romance as the first film. This film is desperately underrated on IMDb and deserves a second watch.

What I really loved is the romance between gum-smacking bad girl Stephanie and the seemingly upper-classed and very intelligent Michael. The romance is very much like the first "Grease" story but in reverse but "Grease 2" is a romance story all of it's own.

The soundtrack is not bad - in fact, it's quite good for a musical! There are not a whole lot of musicals where the songs are catchy like in both of the Grease films.

Again, I think more people should give this movie another chance (viewing) and for those that have not seen Grease 2 - watch it and judge the movie for yourself instead of reviews! 8/10

In my opinion, this movie shouldn't be rated on it's merits as a film. It's simply god-awful - but that being said, you cannot tear yourself away!

The songs themselves are ridiculous, the performances of them even more so but the kitsch value cannot be underestimated. Laugh as Michelle Pfeiffer spins across campus like a deranged duck at the end of "Cool Rider". Chortle as Maxwell Caufield (in an absolutely horrendous sweater) desperately tries to carry a tune. Giggle at all of the players as they attempt to make a serious go of it!

That this is a bad movie & doesn't live up to the original goes without saying. But there is definite entertainment value to be gotten from this disaster and you shouldn't discount that. Tonight...we bowl!

The first Grease was one of the greatest movies ever. This version is horrible. It is the exact same story with the sexes reversed, combined with god awful songs. This movie was a bad remake to try to pull audiences back into musicals. I reccomend not seeing this movie.

Yes, it has REALLY bad acting, a laughable storyline and 2D characters, all trying hard to escape a thick layer of cheese. But there is something about this film (other than Caulfield in leathers, mieow) that somewhere down the line makes it appealing. The songs, for the most part are hideous and i cringed with embarasment when i watched it recently.... but i can remember singing along with delight to "reproduction" when i was 14 years old!! first a foremost a film is to entertain, whether that means it gives you a good laugh when strictly speaking it isnt a comedy, then there you go!! this film could have been so much more, but unfortunately it died on its arse. still, just for being a teenage favourite i still have to give it an 8 out of 10 (so shoot me!!).

Well, at least my theater group did, lol. So of course I remember watching Grease since I was a little girl, while it was never my favorite musical or story, it does still hold a little special place in my heart since it's still a lot of fun to watch. I heard horrible things about Grease 2 and that's why I decided to never watch it, but my boyfriend said that it really wasn't all that bad and my friend agreed, so I decided to give it a shot, but I called them up and just laughed. First off the plot is totally stolen from the first one and it wasn't really clever, not to mention they just used the same characters, but with different names and actors. Tell me, how did the Pink Ladies and T-Birds continue years on after the former gangs left? Not to mention the creator face motor cycle enemy, gee, what a striking resemblance to the guys in the first film as well as these T-Birds were just stupid and ridiculous.

Another year at Rydell and the music and dancing hasn't stopped. But when a new student who is Sandy's cousin comes into the scene, he is love struck by a pink lady, Stephanie. But she must stick to the code where only Pink Ladies must stick with the T-Birds, so the new student, decides to train as a T-Bird to win her heart. So he dresses up as a rebel motor cycle bandit who can ride well and defeat the evil bikers from easily kicking the T-Bird's butts. But will he tell Stephanie who he really is or will she find out on her own? Well, find out for yourself.

Grease 2 is like a silly TV show of some sort that didn't work. The gang didn't click as well as the first Grease did, not to mention Frenchy coming back was a bit silly and unbelievable, because I thought that she graduated from Rydell, but apparently she didn't. The songs were not really that catchy; I'm glad that Michelle was able to bounce back so fast, but that's probably because she was the only one with talent in this silly little sequel, I wouldn't really recommend this film, other than if you are curious, but I warned you, this is just a pathetic attempt at more money from the famous musical.

2/10

Oh my God! This is the worst film since Aurora. You'd think that, when you do a sequel to such a classic as Grease, you'd at lest spend a little money on things like the script. You'd also think that they'd realise they'd have to do something special to have even a ghost of a chance of competing with the first movie. Not here. Just throw in a bunch of young actors, some cheap costumes and write a few lousy songs and you have the perfect recipe.......for a flop.

I won't go on about all the really crass things in the film, except to say that the ending, with motorbikes jumping a pool, was truly pathetic.

How sad to see Michelle Pfeiffer in this. Thankfully it didn't sink her career - she can count herself very lucky there. Adrian Zmed also hammed it up terribly and looked to be about four feet tall through most of the film.

Twenty years ago, and still this dog shows up on TV from time to time.

Okay, so was the original Grease the greatest movie of all time? Of course not. But at least it was fun, had catchy songs, and a good cast.

Grease 2 has none of the above. The problems with this movie, as well as why it bombed so badly are as follows, in my opinion.

1. This movie had no star power. the original "Grease" had John Travolta, who had just come off doing "Saturday Night Fever" and had been on "Welcome Back Kotter." It also had Olivia Newton-John, at the time one of the biggest recording artists in the world. Jeff Conaway was on "Taxi" and had been on Broadway. Stockard Channing was also known for film and TV. Who did "Grease 2" have? Maxwell Caufield, who was unknown, and Michelle Pfeiffer, also unknown at the time.

2. The story line and characters. The "Grease" sequel had a bad girl and good boy meeting and going against the high school social hierarchy, opposite of the first film. That would have been fine, if both of the characters had been willing to change for each other, as Danny and Sandy both were. But they weren't, and none of this movie made much sense. Why did they start prepping for an end of the year talent show on the first day of school? On top of a poor story line, not one of the characters were even likable. If you have unknown actors in a film, you need a story line, or something, to attract them.

3.The songs. The original "Grease" film had songs that are still played on the radio today. This film has classics (haha) like "Reproduction" and "Cool Rider." Yeah, I never hear those songs on the radio these days.

4. The direction. They hired a former choreographer to direct this film instead of someone with actual experience directing a film.

There are some movies that are so good they're bad. "Grease 2" is not one of those films. It's just plain bad.

I work in a video store so I watch a lot of movies and this is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. And not in a good way. It is in my bottom five along with Wrong Turn. I liked Grease. This has very little to do with Grease.

This is not campy or fun or fun to make fun of. It is not "so bad its good". It is just bad. Dull. Boring. Pointless. Should never have been made.

Didi Conn reprising her roll as Frenchy is kind of interesting for a minute but not worth watching. Watch anything else, its guaranteed to be better (unless its Wrong Turn..)

How ironic, my favourite movie is Grease, and my least favourite is Grease 2! Sure, the gorgeous John Travolta wasn't in it, but that's not why it was so terrible. The T-Birds were highly superficial (in the original you never saw the gang get all worked up about reputations, and being obsessed with constantly wearing their leather jackets etc.). The acting was awful, and the songs are some of the most badly produced piles of toss I've ever subjected my ears to.

When I was 10 bad my little sister was 8, we watched this movie over and over and over again and it made us so happy. It's one of our favorite movies as kids. I just watched it again and it still makes me happy. Honestly, I've never seen Grease so I have nothing to compare it to. I guess I don't wanna mess up my love for Grease 2. I suppose I'll finally watch it some day.

Depending on when you saw this film relative to when you saw the original "Grease," your viewpoints probably differ as to the quality of this movie.

I saw both within a month of each other at age 13. I hated the original and loved this one.

As I've gotten older, I've come to recognize that the original is a better piece of work, overall. The music from the original is better when taken as a whole. The supporting cast of the original has better players. The storyline doesn't seem as convoluted at times.

But there's something about this movie that holds on to you. It appeals much more to the age group pictured in the movie (i.e., junior-high and high-schoolers). The song "Cool Rider" and the scenes that accompany it in the movie rival anything in the original.

The dialog is better in places and the interplay between the male and female leads are better, I believe, than in the original. The original movie's pairing of Travolta and Newton-John gave us a dimwit trying to woo a goodie-two-shoes girl whose performance was oftentimes wooden and uncomfortable. This one gives us Caulfield and Pfeiffer, and the interplay between an intelligent, wise-beyond-his-years male lead and the "wild child" female lead.

Adrian Zmed's supporting performance as Johnny still cracks me up and is one of the few performances from this movie that still entertain me as an adult.

That's because outside of the performances of accomplished character actors Christopher McDonald, Eve Arden and Dody Goodman, the rest of this cast is just plain bad. Some of it is bad acting, some of it is miscasting and a lot of it is bad writing.

What we're left with today, 20-something years later, is a movie that made a really good attempt to build on the original, but in the end, was the soufflé that fell. It's still better than most want to admit, but it could have stood a couple of rewrites and a little more attention to detail in the prospective cast interview room.

OH god this is a really horrible movie. Compared to it's predecessor which by the way I gave a 10. This movie is a 1. The songs were pathetic, most likely written by a 7th grade girl with some help MAYBE from a couple of 8th grade boys. in the dictionary, under the word "Hokey", this movie is listed in the definition. Why don't they spoof this on MST3K, it certainly deserves it!!!