Having pulled off an escape from Tweedy's farm, Ginger has found a peaceful island sanctuary for the whole flock. But back on the mainland the whole of chicken-kind faces a new threat, and G... Read allHaving pulled off an escape from Tweedy's farm, Ginger has found a peaceful island sanctuary for the whole flock. But back on the mainland the whole of chicken-kind faces a new threat, and Ginger and her team decide to break in.Having pulled off an escape from Tweedy's farm, Ginger has found a peaceful island sanctuary for the whole flock. But back on the mainland the whole of chicken-kind faces a new threat, and Ginger and her team decide to break in.
- Nominated for 1 BAFTA Award
- 1 win & 9 nominations total
Thandiwe Newton
- Ginger
- (voice)
Zachary Levi
- Rocky
- (voice)
Bella Ramsey
- Molly
- (voice)
Imelda Staunton
- Bunty
- (voice)
Lynn Ferguson
- Mac
- (voice)
David Bradley
- Fowler
- (voice)
Jane Horrocks
- Babs
- (voice)
Romesh Ranganathan
- Nick
- (voice)
Daniel Mays
- Fetcher
- (voice)
Josie Sedgwick-Davies
- Frizzle
- (voice)
Nick Mohammed
- Dr. Fry
- (voice)
Julia Sawalha
- Ginger
- (voice)
- …
David Brooks
- Burly Guard
- (voice)
Dan Williamson
- Van Driver
- (voice)
Tom Doggart
- 2D Narrator
- (voice)
- …
Sam Fell
- 2D Animated Boy
- (voice)
- …
Featured reviews
The stop motion is always on point. Impressive, when you think about how much time goes into it.
If you work really hard, you can probably scrape together some respect for the production, but that might be the only feeling you can evoke. The voice acting isn't great, and not just because the original actors are missing. There's a strange disconnect between the animation and the acting, it feels insincere and forced.
The story is nothing new, and it should have been. It should have broke new ground just as the original did. It really feels like they put no effort into creating an original plot and just clung to the coat tales of the first film. Seems like a bad choice.
I want to write something positive about it but I don't really know what that could be. I guess Bella Ramsey was good casting. I'm only giving it 5 stars because I appreciate the time it takes to make stop motion.
If you work really hard, you can probably scrape together some respect for the production, but that might be the only feeling you can evoke. The voice acting isn't great, and not just because the original actors are missing. There's a strange disconnect between the animation and the acting, it feels insincere and forced.
The story is nothing new, and it should have been. It should have broke new ground just as the original did. It really feels like they put no effort into creating an original plot and just clung to the coat tales of the first film. Seems like a bad choice.
I want to write something positive about it but I don't really know what that could be. I guess Bella Ramsey was good casting. I'm only giving it 5 stars because I appreciate the time it takes to make stop motion.
For me, this sequel was a decent continuation of the original. It was based on the same concept as the original with some minor additions.
The story was simple and light hearted just like the original, the screenplay was decent, the direction was decent, the animation was unique like the original and the voice actors did a good job. The thrill elements were embedded nicely in the story which makes this normal story little bit enjoyable.
But to be honest, I think this sequel was unnecessary as it was underwhelming if we compare it to the original. Overall, this movie was a decent entertainer.
The story was simple and light hearted just like the original, the screenplay was decent, the direction was decent, the animation was unique like the original and the voice actors did a good job. The thrill elements were embedded nicely in the story which makes this normal story little bit enjoyable.
But to be honest, I think this sequel was unnecessary as it was underwhelming if we compare it to the original. Overall, this movie was a decent entertainer.
Say what you want about the man but Mel Gibson is sorely missed, that was one of many mistakes this movie made. Flat, boring, pretty, but not fun. The original stands as a childhood favorite that I've watched with my kid many times but nugget of whatever, will be forgotten in a week. Yet another in a long list of agenda filled Netflix blunders. When will they learn? (Side note about Netflix as a production company: finally canceling my subscription after ANOTHER price hike, removing Christmas movies around the holidays, while other services put them behind pay walls is just a greedy, disgusting practice imo, streaming is out of control and people are finding alternatives)
The film was amusing enough (lots of slapstick humour) and I enjoyed the fun details in the animations, e.g. A hot air balloon disguised as a cloud, and the factory "eye register" including a night-shift worker with very bloodshot eyes..
That being said, the storyline felt unoriginal and became flat halfway through; it was too obvious what was going to happen. Chat GPT could have written it - and given many industries' overreliance on AI, it wouldn't surprise me if that were the case.
I also have to agree with some other reviewers that the personality of main characters was watered down, especially Rocky. The original Rocky's bragging bravado was a big driving force and source of parody in the first film. The sequel's endless slapstick humour and flat characters didn't do enough for me.
That being said, the storyline felt unoriginal and became flat halfway through; it was too obvious what was going to happen. Chat GPT could have written it - and given many industries' overreliance on AI, it wouldn't surprise me if that were the case.
I also have to agree with some other reviewers that the personality of main characters was watered down, especially Rocky. The original Rocky's bragging bravado was a big driving force and source of parody in the first film. The sequel's endless slapstick humour and flat characters didn't do enough for me.
Not as good as the first one as the setting is a lot more fantastical and silly, but it still has the Aardman charm and style with goofy looking characters and inventive contraptions. The plot clearly shows its inspiration from classic films and whilst being a bit too long, it has lots of humour, jokes and wacky adventures to keep it entertaining. The different voice actors aren't as good and the modern pop song at the start felt out of place, but the animation is great (if less hand-made) and full of vibrant colours and it has those little touches which make it something special.
Overall score = 7/10.
Overall score = 7/10.
Did you know
- TriviaIf viewed closely during the film's final shot, an imposter chicken in the form of the nefarious penguin Feathers McGraw from the second Wallace & Gromit short, "Wrong Trousers," can be seen.
- GoofsDespite being remarried, Melisha still goes by the name 'Mrs Tweedy'. As made clear in the first film, this is her married name that she got from her previous husband as opposed to being a maiden name. However, some women keep their previous surname when they marry or re-marry.
- Crazy creditsThere is an image of two chickens in collars with happy faces riding a sky glider behind the duration of the credits until the "Songs" section where it fades to black.
- ConnectionsFeatured in AniMat's Crazy Cartoon Cast: Ginger Snapped (2020)
- SoundtracksMy Sweet Baby
Written by Josh Crocker, John Crocker and Charlotte Jane
Produced by Josh Crocker
Paloma Faith appears courtesy of RCA Records/Sony Music UK
- How long is Chicken Run: Dawn of the Nugget?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- Pollitos en fuga: El origen de los nuggets
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime
- 1h 38m(98 min)
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content