Waste of time

Charming and brutal

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Professor Sherman Klump (Eddie Murphy) is stressed by his impending marriage to Denise (Janet Jackson) and his alter-ego Buddy Love's threatened reemergence. He creates a new fountain of youth formula but it quickly fails. He extracts Buddy Love but in the process of separation, his mind starts to deteriorate. Buddy Love tries to take his youth formula and he hides it at home. Family members find the serum and start using it for their own benefit.There is a charm with the original even in its juvenile nature. This one has no charms and wallows in juvenile humor. There are countless fart jokes. They are too many to count. It's weak humor but not irredeemable. That is until a giant hamster fires poop out of its butt. It's too stupid and not funny at all. It deteriorates from a bad sequel to a franchise killer. The story itself is clunky. There are multitudes of issues which leave this not salvageable.

Frustrated by erratic and uncontrollable behavior at the hands of his troublesome alter ego, Professor Sherman Klump undergoes an experiment that separates his personality and allows the suave Buddy Love to become his own person. This time around they're battling each other for possession of invaluable scientific research which only further complicates matters in Sherman's personal life with colleague Jackson. Murphy, who's clearly having fun in his pull-out-all-the-stops portrayal of a horny grandmother, is as likable and energetic as he's ever been, but the script is awfully slim and throws out only a few genuinely funny ideas. A disappointment considering the impact of its predecessor. **

Sherman Klump is getting married, and the family could not be more delighted for him. But Buddy Love, his alter-ego, is back and trying to make it on his own. Buddy keeps resurfacing in untimely outbursts, and threatening the professor's marriage plans to Denise. Utilising Denise's cutting edge DNA research, Sherman decides to rid himself of his nemesis, and his outbursts once and for all by extracting Buddy's DNA from his system. But Buddy bursts full bodied into Sherman's world and lays claim to the professor's invention, a revolutionary youth serum. Desperate to keep it from Buddy, Sherman hides the serum in the Klump family home, thinking it will be safe. But to get it, Buddy has to deal with the entire Klump family first....The first film was a return to form for Murphy, he put everything he had into that movie, and it was one of the most heartwarming movies of Murphys career.This in the other hand, is the Buddy Love to that movie. It's loud, crass, really over the top with the innuendo, and worst of all devoid of any laughs.I was looking forward to the family having dinner scene, but it was basically the same as the first, and everything that you liked about Sherman was taken away, thanks to his little outbursts every now and again.The first film had a great script and story, but this relies heavily on gross out humour and disgusting set pieces.This was the beginning of Murphys second decline, almost ten years after his first, and apart from Shrek, he still has to recover.It's his worst movie by miles, and i've seen Best Defence.

How much can you really expect of a film containing giant hampsters, naked grannies and Eddie Murphy behaving like a dog (literally)? Unfortunately, most attempts at humour were crude to the point of evoking disgust, offence or substandard raunchiness, the combination of which isn't all that funny. The repeated heavy focus on Eddie Murphy meant it needed a remarkable solo effort to steal the show but 'The Klumps' was devoid of the charm and Murphy dazzle of its predecessor. The makeup remained the one admirable point. The more time the camera revolves around the rest of the Klumps has you appreciating the brilliance of the makeup, which adds to each character in its own individual way. The bantering and squabbling between the mother and father and even the grandma at times, overshadows the main relationship between Murphy and Janet Jackson's characters which is fraught with standardism and monotony. Though, on this occasion, grandma's mutterings don't hold as much value as they did in the first film and become hit and miss in the humour stakes at best. Apart from the odd brief section here and there, it was an asinine attempt at humour which bordered upon facetious at times.