dex14

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4046784/?ref_=nv_sr_2

Since the first one is getting a little talk, starting a thread for the sequel. Looks like they got a nice cast for this one.

Wolf359

Wow, only a year later? That's a quick turnaround.

taffer

It's not unusual, especially for book-to-movie adaptations, to have such quick turnarounds.

The Lord of the Rings and Hobbit movies were all done within a year of each other.
The Hunger Games series are all within a year of each other.
The Harry Potter series was 8 movies within 10 years, so it was fairly close to one movie per year.
I think the Twilight series was yearly as well. Although I'm not quite sure since that series sucks donkey ass, and I don't pay attention to it. Real vampires don't fucking sparkle in the fucking sun.

dex14

Divergent too.

taffer

Forgot that one.

Also several movies not based upon book series have been shot back to back.

Donner's Superman I and II
Back to the Future II and III
Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions
Kill Bill I and II
Pirates of the Caribbean II and III
The upcoming Avengers: Infinity War Parts I and II

There are probably several others I am forgetting too.

SuckaMC

I really liked the first one. Will definitely check this in the theater.

Solid Snake

Kill Bill was originally one film so shot back to back doesn't count.

Infinity War hasn't happened yet but yeah. It'll fit the back to back.

hanshotfirst1138

I paid twice. If I paid twice, it's two films.

And once they agreed to split it in half, didn't QT expand the shooting schedule and change the structure?

dex14

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6wCjEkN3bSg?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

dsa_shea

We are actually watching The Maze Runner as I type this.

sven

First one was pretty disappointing.

Big Boy Laroux

The first movie was decent. Certainly had some good moments, but overall was OK.

What worries me is that the source material for this movie (and the 3rd one) is MUCH worse than the first book. Maybe the adaptation will be better, but the 2nd and 3rd books were convoluted and fell victim to the "too complex, too much exposition" problem most sci-fi book sequels hit.

funkyryno

I thought the maze was the best part about the first film -- not sure why I should be bothered to watch the sequel.

SuckaMC

The apocalypse poster and my like of the first movie guarantees I'll be seeing this.

Matthew Chmiel

No, the film was already shot and nearly completed when they decided to split it into two.

The decision was made July 2003 (after Miramax had already started to advertise the film), Volume 1 hit theaters October 2003. I just remember the internet being pissed by the decision.

dex14

Saw this tonight. I'll give them props for the fact that is nothing like the first movie. All of these YA movie adaptations just feel like the same movie over and over. It definitely could've cut 20 minutes or so out of the middle. It dragged. There was some good action and stunts. I still think Dylan O'Brien is a good lead. Overall, decent, not great. Same way I felt towards the first movie.

Wes Ball will direct the 3rd movie. It is not being split in 2.

dvdjunkie32

I enjoyed the first one as a good Saturday afternoon popcorn flick. I'll be seeing this tomorrow.

Goldberg74

Rewatched The Maze Runner last night and will catch this one sometime next week. My kids and I liked the first movie (and they've read all the books).

SuperJim88

If there ever is a film that abuse the flashback technique this has to be it. At some point, I just felt really annoyed how each flashback provides so little detail and thus force you to keep flashback to the same story over and over again. If you cut out the flashbacks, this second installment would have just been a several round of cat and mouse. I suppose that's probably by design, for the first installment cat and mouse set in the maze, and the second installment cat and mouse would have to be some sort of chase. Overall, enjoyable. I'd definitely check out the third installment.

Ash Ketchum

I was intrigued by the scenes of a devastated post-disaster New York City as shown in the trailer. If I see this, it's only because of those scenes. To those who've seen it, how much of the film takes place in this setting? How much time is devoted to the New York scenes. Is it worth seeing in a theater for this reason? Or should I wait for cable or a rental?

Thanks.

kd5

My wife & I enjoyed the first MR, will definitely be adding this one to the collection, sight unseen, when it gets to my price point (we actually saw the trailer so it's not completely sight unseen). The first MR was different, it was interesting, suspenseful, entertaining, and it has re-watch value. That's enough for me. This one looks to be much the same...

Spiderbite

I would estimate about 20 minutes in the post-disaster city setting. I would wait and rent it unless you are a fan of the books and just want to see the adaptation on the big screen.

I saw it this morning with my son and we also took a friend of his. Both of them have read the books (I have not) and both said that they thought it was okay but that the book was better.

I liked the first one well enough (as someone else said, the maze is the most interesting part)but this one seemed to be way too long and dragged quite a bit. Lots of talking and the few actions just weren't that interesting. Nothing you haven't seen before and done better.

And this movie falls victim to so many other movies coming out lately...it is just a build-up for the next movie. I felt that every shred of dialogue was going to go unanswered and guess what? I was right. Nothing gets settled and you are going to have to wait for the next movie to get truly anywhere (or maybe the movie after that...or after that...or after that).

Not many people in the theater this morning but it was a 10am showing on a Sunday so that makes it a little tough to tell how well it is doing.

My rating: **1/2 out of *****

Solid Snake

I found the first movie to be pretty mediocre. The Maze being the the one bit of intrigue cuz that's the big mystery. I HATED those cyborg monsters. Jesus. They were very unimaginative in terms of design.

RichC2

I haven't seen the first, I guess I should wait until the trilogy is finished, granted they finish it.

Wolf359

I kind of enjoyed the first movie, but this was just a boring chore. The only enjoyment I got was how some scenes felt like they could have been from a Last of Us movie.