The original My Girl was a wonderful family film about a girl dealing with lifes trials the main one being the death of her best friend played by Macaulay Culkin who died from a fatal allergic reaction to bee stings near the end of the first film.
The first movie concluded the story nicely and with a hopeful ending. While it was heartbreaking she lost her best and closest friend we realized that Vada (Anna Chlumsky) was going to be ok by the time the movie ended.
Three years had passed and desperate to make money the studio and filmmakers brought Vada back in a sequel that when I first saw it felt it was as good as the first film but in viewing both films fairly recently I am sad to say this sequel just doesnt hold a candle to its moving and far more enjoyable predecessor.
Like so many sequels My Girl 2 seemed desperate to reunite the cast and director of the previous film and they completely forgot what made its predecessor the hit movie it was.
Vada is given a school assignment to write on someone she has never met who is important to her and accomplished something great. Since her dads marriage to her mom was so brief as she died right after Vada was born he is of no help to her.
Her Uncle (Richard Masur) who had a small supporting role in the earlier film has since moved away from his family in Pennsylvania to be a mechanic in Los Angeles and lives in a home above the garage owned by his girlfriend (Christine Ebersole) actually giving an enjoyable, likeable performance here.
Vada's now stepmom (Jamie Lee Curtis) has trouble convincing her overprotective father (Dan Aykroyd) to let her visit her uncle in Los Angeles where her mother was born in raised but Aykroyd eventually relents. The uncle's girlfriend has a son (Austin O'Brien) who becomes Vada's companion in search for info on her mom and naturally her love interest.
The problem here is just that the story takes too simple an approach to be entertaining.
The first film had a meaningful story with great life lessons for adults and kids.
This sequel just seems to want to go for sentiment and in doing so the story just really isnt all that interesting.
The most interesting part of the film is Vada discovering her mom had a husband before being married to her actual dad (John David Souther) and he is the one who ultimately gives her the information she desires about her mom.
The search for the mom doesnt answer questions that should be. What did Vada's mom truly accomplish that was great other than giving birth to her?
Also the story of her and O'Brien just doesnt have the depth that her and Culkin did the first time.
O'Brien just comes across as a smug, selfish kid initially and his interactions with Vada dont have the same meaning like the first movie did.
I think the sequel could have worked a lot better if Vada were the main focus. What could challenge her at this point in her life?
Why not focus more on relationships with boys and her family like it did in the beginning of the film before she went to LA? That could have made for an interesting film.
Or why not focus on her building a relationship with Souther? Their scenes together are by far the best and most moving in the film. Why not have a majority of the story focus on that? It could have been a great movie.
If you liked the first My Girl I would recommend watching this one. It has merits. But just dont expect to be moved and have a sense of hope like the first movie gave its audience.
I dont think this is one of the worst sequels of all time, nor is it a bad sequel or a bad film overall. I just think if the story had stayed closer to the original film it would have been as good as its predecessor.
I would say it is worth a watch for the scenes with Souther but I wished the movie would have focused on the two of them bonding over memories of her mom and growing to have a friendship with each other or on Vada dealing with trials in an optimistic way as a teenager rather than mostly focusing on finding out who her mom was.
Her mom seems to be the main character here in terms that the movie mainly focuses on her when the story should be more about Vada herself.
A sequel worth a watch but just one that left me with an empty feeling and wanting something more and different.
I think more time with Aykroyd and Curtis could have also made this a stronger and better film.
In the first movie Aykroyd's character was frustrating as he didnt relate to his daughter but he also had our sympathy and our care. We realized he was a flawed person and he made us want to root for him in developing into a stronger character by the end of the film which he became.
Here with what little screen time Aykroyd has (despite the fact he and Curtis get top billing their performances here are really more extended cameos), he comes across as more of a goofy stereotypical dad character almost like the poor man's Steve Martin.
Curtis practically has no character development. She was interesting in the first film as a free-spirited hippie cosmetologist, now she just has more of a role of a mother in a weekly sitcom and really does nothing with her character.
In conclusion a sequel with merits, but also one with a lot of missed opportunities for a better movie.
The first movie concluded the story nicely and with a hopeful ending. While it was heartbreaking she lost her best and closest friend we realized that Vada (Anna Chlumsky) was going to be ok by the time the movie ended.
Three years had passed and desperate to make money the studio and filmmakers brought Vada back in a sequel that when I first saw it felt it was as good as the first film but in viewing both films fairly recently I am sad to say this sequel just doesnt hold a candle to its moving and far more enjoyable predecessor.
Like so many sequels My Girl 2 seemed desperate to reunite the cast and director of the previous film and they completely forgot what made its predecessor the hit movie it was.
Vada is given a school assignment to write on someone she has never met who is important to her and accomplished something great. Since her dads marriage to her mom was so brief as she died right after Vada was born he is of no help to her.
Her Uncle (Richard Masur) who had a small supporting role in the earlier film has since moved away from his family in Pennsylvania to be a mechanic in Los Angeles and lives in a home above the garage owned by his girlfriend (Christine Ebersole) actually giving an enjoyable, likeable performance here.
Vada's now stepmom (Jamie Lee Curtis) has trouble convincing her overprotective father (Dan Aykroyd) to let her visit her uncle in Los Angeles where her mother was born in raised but Aykroyd eventually relents. The uncle's girlfriend has a son (Austin O'Brien) who becomes Vada's companion in search for info on her mom and naturally her love interest.
The problem here is just that the story takes too simple an approach to be entertaining.
The first film had a meaningful story with great life lessons for adults and kids.
This sequel just seems to want to go for sentiment and in doing so the story just really isnt all that interesting.
The most interesting part of the film is Vada discovering her mom had a husband before being married to her actual dad (John David Souther) and he is the one who ultimately gives her the information she desires about her mom.
The search for the mom doesnt answer questions that should be. What did Vada's mom truly accomplish that was great other than giving birth to her?
Also the story of her and O'Brien just doesnt have the depth that her and Culkin did the first time.
O'Brien just comes across as a smug, selfish kid initially and his interactions with Vada dont have the same meaning like the first movie did.
I think the sequel could have worked a lot better if Vada were the main focus. What could challenge her at this point in her life?
Why not focus more on relationships with boys and her family like it did in the beginning of the film before she went to LA? That could have made for an interesting film.
Or why not focus on her building a relationship with Souther? Their scenes together are by far the best and most moving in the film. Why not have a majority of the story focus on that? It could have been a great movie.
If you liked the first My Girl I would recommend watching this one. It has merits. But just dont expect to be moved and have a sense of hope like the first movie gave its audience.
I dont think this is one of the worst sequels of all time, nor is it a bad sequel or a bad film overall. I just think if the story had stayed closer to the original film it would have been as good as its predecessor.
I would say it is worth a watch for the scenes with Souther but I wished the movie would have focused on the two of them bonding over memories of her mom and growing to have a friendship with each other or on Vada dealing with trials in an optimistic way as a teenager rather than mostly focusing on finding out who her mom was.
Her mom seems to be the main character here in terms that the movie mainly focuses on her when the story should be more about Vada herself.
A sequel worth a watch but just one that left me with an empty feeling and wanting something more and different.
I think more time with Aykroyd and Curtis could have also made this a stronger and better film.
In the first movie Aykroyd's character was frustrating as he didnt relate to his daughter but he also had our sympathy and our care. We realized he was a flawed person and he made us want to root for him in developing into a stronger character by the end of the film which he became.
Here with what little screen time Aykroyd has (despite the fact he and Curtis get top billing their performances here are really more extended cameos), he comes across as more of a goofy stereotypical dad character almost like the poor man's Steve Martin.
Curtis practically has no character development. She was interesting in the first film as a free-spirited hippie cosmetologist, now she just has more of a role of a mother in a weekly sitcom and really does nothing with her character.
In conclusion a sequel with merits, but also one with a lot of missed opportunities for a better movie.