The Last Seduction II

It's possibly the worst I've movie I've ever seen.

Joan Severance (Bridget Gregory) is completely devoid of sex appeal - a quality fairly crucial to the role - and does little more than smoke throughout every scene. Con O'Neill (Troy Fenton) made me want to vomit for the duration; yes, he's supposed to be a repulsive character but it was a little too literal. Beth Goddard (Murphy) was weak, although she was the only character with any sort of sexual allure, and I'm not even going to bother commenting on the rest of the characters.

The story lines are predictable, the portrayal of the British as being nothing more than common thugs is offensive, and the whole thing should come with a health-warning. Literally.

This is a tawdry, cheap and offensive little movie that should have been strangled at birth. Not only an offense to the brilliant film it allegedly is a sequel to, but to anyone who might rent or watch it on that strength. Dismally acted, scripted and shot, it is one of the genuinely worst movies I have had the displeasure to see.

This is a hugely disappointing sequel and doesn't do justice to the original. One would think that whomever decided to make a sequel, they would at least start with half decent script. I've rarely heard such appallingly bad dialogue. It is also, as others have pointed out, insulting to the British. The only good thing about the film is Joan Severance, despite her constant smoking. She may not be a great actress but anyone who thinks that Joan Severance is totally devoid of sex appeal is devoid of a pulse in my opinion. Though not in Linda Fiorentino's class - certainly as far as this role is concerned - she is still a stunning and sexy woman.

I really wish I could give this movie lower than one star. It is an insulting follow-up to one of the best modern films noir ever made. I was initially intrigued when I saw the title, and I expected an ample follow-up to Bridget Gregory's antics. I was sorely disappointed to see none of the original cast in the credits, but persevered nonetheless; maybe it still had merit, I hoped. My disappointment spiraled downward to mild anger that anyone would waste time making such an offensively inferior "sequel" as this one. It really was soft-core porn; I fully expected the two women with larger roles to contrive some way to get it on. Ugh.

I wonder if the actors in this one can salvage their careers?

The only seductive element about this twaddle was the title which leads one to hope that the film might have some connection with the original.

The connection is there alright in the central character but that's about it. The plot line is pretty well unfathomable and the acting generally wooden. The decision to 'European-ise' the whole thing and import B-list English actors ( who have all been seen in much better things and really need to change their agents) is a disaster. Even a couple of bursts of gratuitous violence are badly done and every character in it lacks any form of credibility. The two female leads flash their stocking tops but still manage to generate no more than a fraction of the eroticism that Linda Fiorentino could have done in the original wearing a heavy overcoat and a ski hat. Suitable only for film students who really want to know what 'awful' really looks like.