Attention, Zombieland fans : The first reviews on the sequel Zombieland: Double Tap have arrived. And there is quite a mix out there. Now that it's not a cult comedy hit, we expect that there will be some who love to continue what they loved about the first and others who were not exactly impressed from the start. So let us get in easily.
The Bad: The First Half Is Slow
Zombieland had a pretty strong entry. It set the Columbus rules and immediately came to the zombie apocalypse. But the sequel is not quite as responsive and runs a while before the action starts.
According to io9, the first act is a bit "disconnected" as the film tries to keep you up to date What has happened in the last ten years and from then on. "One story goes on until you forget another. Then this story returns and slows down the momentum of the first. It's not bad just to have fun, "writes Germain Lussier.
The Good: The new characters are fun
Now for some good news. The first film is based almost exclusively on the four survivors, apart from the excellent Bill Murray cameo. This time, there are some new faces. And they are adorable. Peter Debruge writes for Variety that Rosario Dawson's Nevada is the "most welcome addition" to the crew.
Dawson is not the only celebrated newcomer. Simon Thompson writes for IGN that Zoey Deutch as Madison is "absolute comedy gold". "How she makes a character that should be incredibly annoying is awesome," adds Thompson.
Worse: The Treatment of Women
Zombieland appeared in 2009 and was ̵
"Some women's quasi-qualified lines do not excuse the fact that these characters exist primarily as love interests for their hormonal male co-stars," writes Debruge.
The So-So: Much Fanservice
Let's face it, most films today offer much of what is called a fan service. That is, meta-quips and nods to earlier films or other related features that reward those who are diligent onlookers. The MCU killed it. And Double Tap offers some of that.
For the Guardian, Benjamin Lee writes that the film is "outdated," "rushed and dusty," adding that "the returning actors repeat the same beats with about as much effort and investment as one would expect could "and the style of the director is" mostly vomited ".
Of course, this is not a bad thing for those who want to see what they loved about the original. Thompson writes: "The original cast works well together again, and Schtick and chemistry are no less appealing and entertaining."