The Butterfly Effect 2 (2006)

Cheapo movie with grade C actors.

They were so cheap they made sure the plot didn't require them to go into the past more than a couple of years. Lame. No costumes to design or sets to build, just put the bad actors in front of modern day things and shoot. They even tacked on the threat of another sequel! If it had been intelligently written I could deal with it. But, noooooooo, they have to do everything but shout out the main woman in this picture is pregnant. Every time she tries to tell someone, wouldn't you know it, she is interrupted. A kid could figure out what she is trying to say 10 minutes into this "film". Of course, the baby will be the start of the next sequel. Did I mention this movie stinks? January 9, 2008

what do u guys want?

seriously what do u guys want?? ..i cant really say this one as good as the first but no way this movie is worth only 2 stars ... i would say the first one is more suited for the young crowd and the second is more suited for older people January 3, 2008

It Doesn't Fly

[Includes Mild Spoilers] So they made a sequel again. Not that I am blaming them for that, but at least they could have done that much better than "The Butterfly Effect 2" where the hero with a special ability to go back in time finds once again that fixing things are not easy as it seems. Or does he? The difference is that "BE2" has neither Ashton Kutcher nor the tightly-knit script of the original that made the film an instant hit.

Eric Lively plays Nick Larson, who loses his girlfriend Julie (Erica Durance) in a car accident. One year later Nick learns that he can change the course of the events by literally going back to the day when the fatal accident happened. But does he succeed? Of course he does.

According the concept of "Butterfly Effect," a small change can alter the whole world - like Ray Bradbury's famous story - and that is also the point of the first film. In the sequel, however, Eric can do what he thinks he has to do so easily (after a wobbling image surrounding him and a headache) that there is no point of using the fascinating concept of the title. Actually, you have no intricate plot, no mystery, no characters to relate, and no good ending. You only get stereotypical characters including "terrifying" gangsters, and silly love-making. To make matters worse, Eric even uses his special power to do what ordinary people (like me) usually do with hard working: getting rich.

That's where I started to lose interest in the story, which evidently needs more improvement, at least ten more twists and turns in the predictable plot. Ridiculous as it is, "A Sound of Thunder" was more entertaining.
December 8, 2007

"whatever happened between us, just wipe it out of your head"

I think that's the worst thing I've ever heard. Why would anyone say that. What human being would say that.

I liked part 1, so when I saw there was a sequel, even knowing it had a very low rating, I wanted to give it chance. I love time travel movies, so if this was ANYTHING like the first one, at a minimum I figured I would get a moderate amount of enjoyment out of it.

All I got was a moderate amount of homicidal thoughts after this. I can't believe that professionals can actually create something so bad. Put aside the bland acting and the boring writing for a second, and look at the way the script was structured. The movie was a little less than 90 minutes long, yet nothing even happens for the first 52 minutes, when the movie's more than half over. There was no development of story or characters whatsoever. A complete waste of 52 minutes of screen time.

Whoever wrote this did the equivalent of building a roller coaster that travels from one side of the park to the other without EVER GOING UP, and instead travels across in a completely straight line, and so as you exit off the coaster, you're wondering "wtf was that??" The writer of this story forgot to add the one key element that makes all stories work on some level: some conflict for a protagonist to overcome, obviously. Nothing resembling drama or suspense took place until either the 52 minute mark, or the 61 minute mark. It all depends on whether you would consider his confrontation with his friend in the garage at the 52 minute mark as something significant that builds the story and moves it forward. If not, then there's definitely NOTHING that happens until the 61 minute mark, which is when he realizes that he's no longer in a relationship with his girlfriend. Now that's actually pretty interesting. But why are we JUST NOW getting into the realm of "he has to fix this disastrous timeline he's now in, one without his girlfriend," with only less than a HALF HOUR of the movie left? What were we watching for the past hour? Everything that happened before was completely inconsequential, you might as well start watching this movie from the 52 or 61 minute mark, you won't miss a thing. October 12, 2007

the Editor should go back in time...

After seeing the first Butterfly Effect, my expectations were high for this sequel. The first was intelligent, tight, engagingly paced and leaves you stunned and pensive.

This sequel might be worth a 4-star rating if there had been no first movie.

What kept this one from being a really good movie were several things:
1- character development was thin;
2- we don't care about the other people in our star's life, before they die (the first time);
3- too many scenes were drawn out unnecessarily to show us that our star was bummed out;
4- our main guy makes a big deal about his soon-to-be killed girlfriend putting her seatbelt on ... but a mack truck broadsides her side of the car. ... um ... I don't think the seatbelt would have saved her;
5- the "update" to being currently PC, is seen by a male-on-male scene. it was easy to see coming, and just as contrived;
6- the ending is disturbing not due to gore, but due to the message that suicide will work out best for those you love.

And pardon me, but did they TRY to make Eric Lively look like Tom Brady? It took me a while to figure out who I felt like I was looking at throughout the film. Hey, no touchdown on this weak sequel. September 2, 2007

More reviews at Amazon.com ...