Diabolik: ¡Ginko al ataque!

The movie is overall very nice and enjoyable. Nice reconstruction of the Diabolik world. Nice costumes. Nice cartoonish scenography. Good overall acting for such kind of film. Just one big stain on it... and therefore a big question..... why to ruin an overall well made movie with the horrible acting of Monica Bellucci and why choose (or accept) to soft focus (or photoshop) her face (and only her) all around the movie when she appear in the scenes? I know... her presence will probably open additional markets to the movie... but I stil don't understand.... Maybe she paid to be in the film if soft focused?

No doubt, this movie is very bad, much worse than predecessor, even worse than the worst comic-book episode. Plot is naïve with lot of illogical points. One has to invest a lot of suspension of disbelief if wants to endure it. But... If you do not take it seriously, you can relax and enjoy it. So bad that it is good, great guilty pleasure, genuine camp. By the way, reconstruction of 1960s is nice, with great accessories and, of course, Italian cars and Italian cities (with my favorite Trieste).

Ms. Bellucci's acting was so bad that I think she was self-ironical and intentionally making fun of the movie. I prefer Mr. Marinelli from the first movie as Diabolik. Better actor with charisma and better looks for main character. Mr. Gianniotti luckily does not have a lot of screen time what is kind of ironic too. Ms. Leone is gorgeous as always.

When the first movie came out, I reviewed it as an interesting experiment with its evident flaws, but not worthy of the way too harsh comments from both critics and viewers.

With this 2nd one, I didn't know what to expect: for various reasons I couldn't watch it in theaters, and also I couldn't find it anywhere 'til now, but still I was very curious to see if I would've found the same results as the first one, if not better, or I would've come to agree with its detractors.

And now that I've finally seen it, I can say ... that there's still too much severity in judging movies that surely are not as good as they could've been, but that still manage to stay far away from total disaster

Starting with the good things, the technical side is always perfectly staged; and also, while in the first one I couldn't picture Mastandrea as Ginko, here he manages to give the role a bit more credibility, and Miriam Leone is still good as Eva, though less impactful and magnetic than before.

But alas, for the rest I cannot really say much more: the first movie tried to balance, not always perfectly, a more grounded approach with a more stylized one, directly referencing the 60s-70s Italian action movies ( the so called "poliziotteschi")

Here, they want to embrace a fully comic book-like atmosphere, and sadly it doesn't build up, resulting too alienating and difficult to accept, even for ones like me more used to movies like this (to quote another Italian title, "5 è il Numero Perfetto" managed to do this way better).

This is reflected especially in the dialogues and the acting of the supporting cast, way too set and "artificial", not to say too marked by dialects that just don't appeal to this kind of story.

Even newcomers like Alessio Lapice and especially Linda Caridi, an actress I grew to admire with each movie I saw her in, are heavily limited by this approach, resulting too much caricatured.

Special Mention to Ester Pantano which appears just at the beginning with a scene that wants to quote as I said a certain kind of movie, but in the end is just a waste of time and characters that could've used way more.

And of course, the most evident change: unfortunately my biggest fear became true, and Giacomo Gianniotti doesn't manage to be as charismatic as the King of Terror should be, nor as cold and lethal, despite many not agreeing with this either.

So, definitely a step back from the imperfect but intriguing and much better built first chapter, but despite anything still nice enough to watch.

The sequel beats the same path as Diabolik (2021): a stylistic throwback to the 1960s and the (European mystery) cinema of the time, with a close adaptation of the feeling of the comic book. Unfortunately this means that it carries all the flaws of its predecessor, coming across as somewhat flat in performance, or didactic in the exposition. The overall vibe of the first movie was interesting enough to make it worth watching, but now the novelty effect starts to wear off. Isn't the planned trilogy too much, an experiment that has gone on for too long not to come across as self-serving?

The new plot doesn't make up for it. Eva Kant is replaced as the real focus of the film by Ginko, the police inspector relentlessly trying to track down Diabolik (like Ganimard to Lupin). Unfortunately, he's not as captivating of a character as Ms. Kant. Luca Marinelli has been replaced by Giacomo Gianniotti as the actor performing Diabolik, and thankfully he's barely given any screentime: while he may be physically more convincing he's less skilled than Marinelli and he's nowhere mysterious or charismatic enough for anyone to believe he should be this story's lead. Monica Bellucci simply shouldn't have been cast.

Not terrible, but it's a notch down from the first and it's increasingly showing a lack of direction. I worry for what's to come.

What else to say? If the Italian film industry keeps financing their movies with taxpayer's money, I believe they will never be able to be as relevant as they were after post WW2. Every film and television production becomes a money grabbing feast at the expenses of the taxpayers (and the industry itself). Millions of euros gets stolen from the budget for personal gain or to cover for their companies debt. It's mayhem, and it show in this miserable trilogy (and the overall state of Italian cinema).