The Fly II

One of the sadder things about today’s taste for movie sequels is the correct, boring classification that goes with it. The film that was released in 1989 is entitled “The Fly II,” but it’s a fatigued movie if ever there was one.

“The Fly II” begins in the delivery room, where Martin Brundle, whose father, Seth Brundle, quite literally went to pieces in David Cronenberg’s 1986 version of “The Fly,” is being born. His mother, Veronica, played by Saffron Henderson, takes one look at him and dies, which is understandable, since Martin is born as a young insect.

However, Martin develops the appearance of a cute little baby, and he is a brilliant child, played by Matthew Moore at 4 and Harley Cross at 10, as well. Raised in a laboratory setting by Anton Bartok, played by Lee Richardson, the industrialist who has big plans for Seth Brundle’s teleportation machine, Martin develops so quickly that in five years he has grown up to be Eric Stoltz, or a nice young man in his mid-20s. Until this part, Martin’s in a lovely life and some of his only friendship comes from a golden retriever who is another of the laboratory’s experiment tests. This pet gives the film with a note of warning, since what happens to it shouldn’t happen to a dog.

Janet Maslin stated in her review, “Eventually, Martin discovers that he has inherited his father's mutant makeup, and that a slow, horrid transformation to insecthood is in the offing.” Mr. Cronenberg offered this process in fascinatingly seductive words, but the sequel has no equal humor or depth. As directed by Chris Walas, who provided some of the makeup and creature effects for the earlier film, “The Fly II” is skilled but hardly clever. Maslin stated, “The only respect in which it matches Mr. Cronenberg's ''Fly'' is in its sheer repulsiveness, since this film degenerates into a series of slime-ridden, glop-oozing special effects in its final half hour.”

Stoltz, who deserves better than a career spent behind makeup, is as unrecognizable in the last stages of this film as he was in “The Mask.” Also, Daphne Zuniga, as the laboratory coworker who falls in love with Martin, spends most of her time looking disappointed, a wise reaction to realizing she has been to bed with a man who’s half-bug. Reappearing from the earlier film is John Getz, as the magazine publisher who was Seth’s enemy for Veronica’s love. Getz gets the new film’s only laugh by stating that the experience of knowing Seth has cost him an arm and a leg. Actually, it has. Maslin ended her review by saying, “ONCE MORE INTO THE SLIME.”

I have to admit that this sequel is pretty forgetful. I wouldn’t recommend this movie at all, especially if you loved the first movie. How could they have made this horrendous sequel when the first one was so great? Why can’t filmmakers learn that instead of being concerned with making money, put in actual effort to making a good sequel? That’s how good sequels are made because the filmmakers put in effort and make it either good, or just as good as the first movie. Good sequels do exist, but they’re not as much as the bad sequels, unfortunately. I know that I have said this before so many times, but people really need to get the word out there and make the filmmakers put in actual effort to make sequels good again.

Now that I have that film off of my chest, that concludes “Fly-a-thon.” Check in tomorrow to see what else is in store for “Halloween Month.” The only hint that I will give away is that we are going to look at another classic made by the king of scary movies, Alfred Hitchcock himself, so stay tuned.