PROBLEM CHILD 2 (1991)

Directed By: Brian Levant 
Written & Story By: Scott Alexander & Larry Karaszewski 
Cinematography By: Peter Smokler 
Editor: Lois Freeman-Fox & Robert P. Seepey 


Cast: Michael Oliver, John Ritter, Jack Warden, Ivyann Schwan, Amy Yasbeck, Gilbert Gotfried, Jonathan Tolkan, Laraine Newman, Eric Edwards, Zach Grenier, Martha Quinn, Charlene Titlton  



Junior and his father, Ben, move from Cold River to Mortville.  Junior becomes threatened by Ben's desire to date again and find a new mother for Junior, and sabotages each of his dates. Ben falls in love with Annie, the school nurse. However, Annie is the mother of Trixie - who is worse than Junior in his behavior and equally resents her mother dating again. Then Ben meets Lawanda, the richest woman in Mortville, who desires to marry Ben and send Junior to boarding school in Bagdad. And Ben now has to make the decision whether to continue to pursue Annie for love or marry Lawanda so Junior can have a mother.




I have to say while I am a fan of both movies. This has got to be one of the most disgusting films I have ever seen and I have seen some pretty gory horror films.

This film is just nasty as far as visuals and jokes. There is a dog poop joke that is about bringing the so called pet out of hypnosis. There is a scenes where because of a blown up toilet a character is forced to wear a diaper only instead of pants. There is a scene on a rollercoaster of projectile vomiting that seems like it never ends. As well as roaches and plenty of fart jokes. --This is pretty much a kids film. A guilty pleasure for them as it is disgusting at every turn. The main attraction to this film is to see if Junior the star of these films has meet his match as far as being a problem child. In another problem child. So that this feels like a battle of movie monsters while introducing a new one.

Just as in the first film juniors hinjinks come off as cute for kids but malicious for. Part of the adult audience and he still resembles a living kind of Chucky doll or child psychopath that we have been conditioned to see, but then again this movie is purely for kids not adults. Even if some of the jokes and humor seem aimed maybe more for a teenage audience. Feels actor Michael Oliver this was it as far as acting other then A guest starring. Role on the Sherman Helmsley series AMEN. Though he might not have ever really worked again he made his mark cinematically.

John Ritter once again stars as the adoptive father who has to be the nicest guy in the world. As he seems to know what his child is capable of but still never quite believes how evil he is. As well as willing to take in his evil father who doesn't think Much of him either. Every character seems more of a caricature he. Anything else. Just as the sequences of John titters character going out on miserable dates after moving into a divorce community.

Where as the characters all fit they also look overly made up. The film does add in plenty of comedic actors to play more annoying roles than anything else where half the scenes make no sense.

Such as Gilbert Gotfried making a return appearance as the school principal who takes his date to a pizza resteraunt that the two hellions of characters are eating with their family and causes a food fight with the foodies most nasty sticky cheese You will ever see in a film. Jack Warden’s seems to he here only to add to the Rogues gallery of villains and earn a paycheck but at least throughout the film he barely has to wear any clothes as he is usually in tropical shorts and robes.

Not to mention Laraine Newman's demented rich woman determined to marry John ritter's character a she looks like many of her ex husbands Amy Yasbeck, (John Ritter's real life wife) is back. In The first film she played his villainous wife. Here she plays his new nice female love interest with darker hair and glasses and she excels once again though has less to do. So that this feels like a franchise for them.

What helps in the film isn’t that most of the supporting characters are so mean and nasty that you actually root for the bad things that happen to them. Unfortunately it just happens that half the time John Ritter also suffers the consequences or victim of these so called revenge tricks. As he is supposed to represent the nicest guy in the world that is the only time the film comes off as maybe too cruel. Showing sometimes the parent has to accept the responsibility when it comes to the crimes of their children.

With this film what you see is what you get. As the film is more aimed at children it’s main audience. While providing a simple storyline to base the events around and gives the parents something to watch and some characters to identify with who aren’t caricatures.

Here at least the film is has a bigger tapestry and locations in which to work. So as a sequel it is better and gives Junior a character who can be a rival to him. Who happens to be female so that allows for a wider fan base for the audience and adds inclusion. In this carnival of grotesque, which I can’ front I was a fan of as a child. Even though it seems almost like an endurance test. As much as I might complain about the film. I actually enjoy it or more enjoyed it as a child and believe it to be entertaining for kids. It might be a movie that partially sickens and shocks me with it's gags. Which is why it stays clear in my head.

Another problem is that this film lacks a successful hit song. To sell the movie and the soundtrack to make it more popular. As a sequel it should be popular enough. This one lacks not only a song but also doesn’t have The Beach Boys to sing one for it.

The film is a fun look back as the screenwriters behind this project have gone on to becoming noted Oscar nominated and Emmy award winning writing duo. Usually writing big screen adapatations of biographies (MAN IN THE MOON, THE PEOPLE VS. LARRY FLYNT, ED WOOD, BIG EYES, THE PEOPLE VS. O.J. SIMPSON)

The movies even continued as TV movies though with most of the main cast replaced.

 Grade: C+