Stuart Little 2 (2002) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
104 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
cute kid's movie
cherold24 December 2003
Some cartoons, even those aimed primarily at children, are still well worth seeing for adults. I was hoping Stuart Little 2 would be one of those, but it falls just a little short of the mark. It's cute, and it's funny enough to have kept me from turning it off, but it's a kid's movie all the way. If you're a parent who wants to watch something with your kid this is a good choice because it's fairly entertaining, but I wouldn't recommend it to adults without kids. But it's darn cute.
16 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Bigger and Better Than the First.
anaconda-4065831 August 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Stuart Little 2 (2002): Dir: Rob Minkoff / Cast: Hugh Laurie, Geena Davis / Voices: Michael J. Fox, Melanie Griffith, Nathan Lane: Major improvement after the pathetic film that preceded it. This one is broader in its themes and contains a simplistic plot yet detailed structure and exciting climax. Hugh Laurie and Geena Davis return as Mr. and Mrs. Little and they are as plain and cardboard as they were in the first film where they seemingly adopt a mouse that wears clothes and not bat an eye at the absurdity. Here we accept it and Stuart joins George Little, the son of the parents, at school. He scores a new friend in the form of a bird named Margalo. She lands in Stuart's miniature car to escape a falcon but the real story is that she is a thief under threat by this falcon. She is forced to steal Mrs. Little's wedding ring. She disappears and Stuart is determined to locate her and face the falcon. Directed by Rob Minkoff who made the horrible first film as well as the Disney masterpiece The Lion King. Michael J. Fox voices Stuart, the mouse determined not to be outdone by his small stature and face odds larger than life. Melanie Griffith voices the soul searching Margalo who discovers friendship and a life outside crime and oppression. Nathan Lane steals scenes voicing Snellbell the fluffy cat with an appetite for food but shies away from danger. Strong themes for families regarding making a difference regardless of one's size. Score: 7 ½ / 10
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
good family flick
veemoffa2 August 2002
While I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, I hold with the minority opinion that it isn't up to the standards of the original. The first movie succeeded in being sweet and charming without being the least bit sugary. Alas, the sequel doesn't entirely avoid this pitfall (that "little high, little low" business is just a little gagging). Also, the plot is too predictable, although that probably won't matter much to children, who are, after all, the film's target audience.

These are really minor quibbles, though. "Stuart 2" is a fine movie, both for kids and adults. The special effects are well-done, all the actors do a good job in their roles, and the dialogue has some real gems. Particularly noteworthy is Snowbell, the cat (voiced to hilarious perfection by Nathan Lane). He gets all the best lines, and steals every scene he's in--he even upstages Stuart himself! Verdict: Good movie. Go see.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
This "Little" goes a long way.
Victor Field2 March 2003
While less isn't always more, the makers of "Stuart Little 2" resisted the temptation to pad it out from its shorthand running time, meaning it goes by quickly and painlessly. Not that the actual plot of this followup to the original charmer is hard to take in itself (Stuart is starting to feel a bit left out, and when Margalo the wren literally drops into his life he gets a new dimension).

In terms of technical levels it's only slightly easier to fault (Margalo looks a bit too cartoonish to be real, unlike Stuart Little himself and the falcon that's the movie's villain - but then again, Melanie Griffith [the voice of Margalo] always seems like a cartoon anyway), but the story by screenwriter Bruce Joel Rubin and the movie's producer Douglas Wick is what makes this ultimately inferior to its predecessor; what helped drive "Stuart Little" was our hero's wish to be accepted by his human brother and by the cat - sneer all you want, but the family message was hard to ignore. For the sequel it's more standard - the friend who's acting out of ulterior motives at first but then turns out to be a real friend, etc. Stuart isn't so much the protagonist this time, and it hurts a little.

So the freshness is reduced, but this still isn't stale - the charm and humour of the first movie remains, Michael J. Fox and Nathan Lane are as adept as ever as Stuart and Snowbell ("This better be important." "Margalo is missing." "I'd better be more specific - I meant important to ME."), and the human Littles remain just right - loving but not without making you want to slit your own throats. HBO Family has recently aired an animated version with all the principals except Hugh Laurie absent - it'll have to go a long way to live up to the two movies. (In-joke for score fans: Alan Silvestri slips in a quote from his "Back to the Future" theme in the climax.)

But I can see why this didn't do as well at the box-office as it should have - having a soccer match plus including Gilbert O'Sullivan AND Celine Dion on the soundtrack was asking for trouble...
13 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Too bad
Lady_Targaryen22 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I know that ''Stuart Little '' is a movie specially Destined for kids, but it is so boring, that I don't know how even kids can handle it, and also how Geena Davis( who is a great actress) had the courage to work in a piece of junk like this. The only funny thing in this movie is Snowbell, the white cat of the Little's family. And that's it. The most annoying thing is the plot: How can a family adopt a mouse and think this is the most normal thing in the world, thinking of him as a son and a brother to his kid? And even more absurd is the idea of Stuart Little going to a human School,having classes and playing soccer with humans. I like family movies, but this one is too awful to be true.
5 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A movie you can watch with your kids
birkland26 August 2005
Sure, this is a kid's movie, but it's sufficiently engaging to hold mom and dad's attention, even through repeated viewings. Little touches like having tiny Stuart wear a NY (football) Giants t-shirt and clever, and the highly stylized look of the film is just fun. The costume designer should get an award for making the costumes look sort of contemporary and "Miracle on 34th Street" at the same time. And while the plot is predictable and telegraphs its punches, it's also gentle and doesn't drag out the scary stuff too long, which makes this a good movie for kids. A lot better than a lot of the kids movies you will run across at Blockbuster.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Inventive nature no longer new and this is only for the kids
SnoopyStyle15 June 2014
Mother Little (Geena Davis) is overly protective of Stuart (Michael J. Fox) and his little size. Mr. Little (Hugh Laurie) is more confident. He almost gets injured in the soccer game when brother George (Jonathan Lipnicki) scores the winning goal. George has a new friend Will. Stuart tries to fix George's model plane, he gets an unintentional ride and wrecks it. George is not happy with Stuart and they grow apart. Then canary Margalo (Melanie Griffith) falls from the sky into Stuart's car. A falcon (James Woods) is chasing them. Margalo is hurt and she stays with the Littles. It turns out that Margalo and the falcon are in it together to rob the Littles. The falcon pushes Margalo to steal mother Little's ring and she flies away. Stuart and Snowbell (Nathan Lane) set off into the scarier parts of NYC to find her while George covers for them.

This doesn't have the fun of discovery of this charming world where a little mouse is treated as any other boy. This starts off with a strained brotherhood between George and Stuart. That could have been a good subject to explore. Instead they introduce a cute canary and sets Stuart off on a different adventure. So instead of a deeper character relationship story, it's another children's adventure story. It's still good for the kids, but not much for everybody else. The short running time also points to the thin material they're working with in this one.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A nice sequel
rbverhoef30 May 2004
'Stuart Little 2' is a nice and sweet sequel with the same charms as the first movie. The mouse Stuart (voice by Michael J. Fox) has an adventure in the big city together with the house cat Snowbell (voice by Nathan Lane) because the bird he loves (voice by Melanie Griffiths) is taken by Falcon (James Woods). Of course the family Little (with Geena Davis, Hugh Laurie and son George played by Jonathan Lipnicki) is looking for Stuart.

A movie like this is allowed to be predictable. You know it will end happy and that is the way it should end. A movie like this needs some charming, sweet and funny moments and 'Stuart Little 2' has those moments. Every moment between Margalo the bird and Stuart is sweet and charming and especially the moments with the real characters are sometimes very funny. Another nice thing is the creation of the mouse and bird itself. Since Stuart or Margalo is in almost every scene in the movie there is always something nice to look at. This is a perfect movie for the whole family.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Stuart Average
patrick-green25 August 2006
Stuart Little 1 was a fun movie,even though there was a bit of sentimental rubbish at times. But Stuart Little 2 was almost nothing like the first film. It was not as funny, there was enough sentimental trash to choke a small horse and there were just too many American values in it. The bird friend was just ridiculous and made you want to chuck your birdwatching binoculars away and buy a shotgun. Snowbell the cat was probably supposed to be the comic relief amidst all the sentimental mayhem but was a massive failure. The falcon just went into the same category as the friendly undersized budgie: shotgun fodder. I felt sorry for my little brother who had to go through this rather unenjoyable pastiche. Things I learned from this movie: -Falcons are nasty, vicious, bloodthirsty pickpockets -cats are afraid of having their house burgled by strange, undersized budgies -Sentimentality in films is like syrup. Thick and sticky -little spectacled brats(eg George Little)belong to some strange subspecies of overgrown garden gnomes with an affection for lab rats (eg Stuart Little).
4 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Another great family film
adamonIMDb16 April 2017
As someone who has always enjoyed the first 'Stuart Little', I found the sequel to be just as charming. Like the original, this is another great family film that can be enjoyed by people of all ages and not just the young kids it's targeted at. The sequel does everything just as well, if not better than the first film.

I'm surprised at how poorly 'Stuart Little 2' was received, not only with the ratings on IMDb, but it also didn't do well at the box-office. Considering the sequel has more adventure and in general more fun than the original, I don't see why so many people seemingly didn't like it. I always thought the 'Stuart Little' films were impossible not to like!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
So-So Story Plot, Ridiculous Acting and Dubbing
divyanka11 November 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Story plot was okay, but so badly carried out that the movie was boring. This entire series is badly made. The garbage acting was shocking and revolting. One can forgive the small children who could not act well, but the mother in particular being hired as an actress at all is a shock. The absence of proper acting was so revolting that this movie was very difficult and frustrating to get through. One could not even tell if the parents, particularly the mother, were happy or scared about any situation, such was the lack of expression. The voice dubbing of the bird was also extremely fake and annoying. The depth of emotions was absent, again, owing to the fake and rubbish acting. The story could have been nicer if these elements were fixed. Other than that, the idea of a mouse brother in a 'loving family' is a good one. Its execution was severely poor, however. The first movie was somewhat better than this one, but the third one being a low-quality animation is disappointing.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A Truly Nice Film
ccthemovieman-12 February 2006
I liked this better than the original, and that''s a high compliment because I thought highly of the original film: Stuart Little. As good as that was, I just thought this was even better.

All the voice-overs are excellent with Nathan Lane having the best lines as "Snowball," the cat. He was simply hilarious, line after line.

The film once again features great colors, a virtual rainbow of them, especially with some of the inventive rooms in the Little house. The parents, once again, are super nice. It's a treat to watch Geena Davis and Hugh Laurie play an old- fashioned "Leave It To Beaver"-type couple. The film has no objectionable material and leaves you with a nice feeling. There are animated films or animated/real life combinations like this, that advertise "family-friendly viewing" but don't really deliver, instead sneaking in sexual innuendos and the like.

Not here. This one is pure, morals-wise, except for one scene near the end when the mom (Geena Davis) tells Stuart and their son she's still proud of them even though they just got caught in a big lie. (Inferring that the lie was okay since everything turned out okay.) Other than that, nothing but good messages were heard and seen all around and this is a funny movie, to boot. Highly recommended for the family, and that's no cliché.
29 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Stuart Little in another big adventure
studioAT3 May 2012
After the success of the original 1999 film the whole cast reunite for this sequel that may be a rare case of a film that betters the original.

Again using the classic book by E.B White as source material this film manages to create story lines that is appealing to both adults and children and moves along at a nice pace.

The human actors are all good in their roles with Hugh Laurie trying out the American accent that would prove useful in the TV series 'House' years later and the voice acting of Nathan Lane and Michael J Fox is great.

Overall a welcome addition to the series and if your family enjoyed the first one they should certainly enjoy seeing what happened to the Little's next.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
for the kids only
Spanner-223 July 2002
This sequel to the mouse as family member film is well.. for the kids only... I found it rather dull for long stretches and, despite first rate animation, nothing much of note happens that would make me care about Stuart or the little birdy he is trying to save. GRADE: D
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Clock Train
smartins-121 September 2006
Dear Sirs,

I have a 3 years old son who's watching all the time "Stuart Little 2". He really loves to wealth it. At the beginning of the movie,there's a scene in which George wakes up by a clock in a shape of a train. We live nearly a railway station and he also loves trains. I would like to know if there's a way of buying such a clock in order to offer him.

I hope you continues to give people all that Stuart Little that Stuart Little Magic.

Best regards

Sílvia Martins
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Dreadful
Leparsdon22 July 2003
I just saw this movie for the first time, and I must say this is awful. It is by far one of THE WORST childrens movies that I have ever seen. The animation is very unbelievable, the story is barely there and I found it just a tad bit ridiculous. The first one was much better (on that child's movie scale)and I would suggest that you save some money and skip this one.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Better than the first one!
marm-5623127 March 2020
It was mostly enjoyable from the middle of the film to the end.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Stuart Little 2
jboothmillard3 November 2008
Warning: Spoilers
From same director Rob Minkoff (The Lion King), this films brings back the cute rodent character based on the book by Charlotte's Web author E.B. White. Basically adopted mouse Stuart (Michael J. Fox) has settled into the Little family very nicely, but mother Eleanor (Geena Davis) is very protective of him, seeing how he's very small, and his father Fredrick (Hugh Laurie) thinks he should be able to do things without worry or fuss. Oh, and Stuart's brother George (Jonathan Lipnicki) has made a new friend, Will (Marc John Jefferies), so he is feeling lonely. That is until he meets and "rescues" canary Margalo (Melanie Griffith) from a Falcon (James Woods), and she soon moves in, but no-one knows she is helping con-artist Falcon. But Margalo does obviously grow to like Stuart and the family for real, and its up to Stuart and Snowbell the cat (Nathan Lane) to save her. This may not have the same charm and wit of the previous film, but there is still some fun to be had. It was nominated the BAFTA Children's Award for Best Feature Film. Okay!
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The Mouse Fights
bigverybadtom4 September 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Things aren't going so well for the mouse, with events such as his getting a flying model plane only for him to crash it right away. Then he befriends a parakeet called Margo, but she turns out to be working for the evil falcon Falco who makes trouble for the Little family. But can Stuart still save the day?

Nothing too wild, everything stays in the New York area, although the villain does experience a "Disney death". But everything is appropriate for the whole family, entertaining for kids and adults. Not deep and meaningful, but fun. A rare instance of the sequel being better than the original.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
cute
dhaufrect25 September 2002
This E.B White story is cute and enjoyable to watch. Even at my old age of 58, there were some moments of laughter with a cartoon like fantasy of a feature. No doubt, the kids in the audience were treated to a fine film for youngsters, since their reactions were so very audible.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Stuart Little 2 Review
margulanabutrlov23 March 2019
Warning: Spoilers
If you drive your own cool, red sports car to school and still you're Billy No-Mates, you've got to ask - are you a man or a mouse? Okay, so Stuart Little's tail gives the game away, but this rodent isn't lacking in courage. When his mum's wedding ring goes missing and his feathered friend Margolo becomes the suspect, our pink-nosed hero embarks on an adventure to rival anything the original had to offer. Stuart is an animation wonder - his tiny face is more expressive than most Hollywood stars', while each strand of his white fur now flutters in the breeze as he flies in a model plane over Central Park. The film's, "You're only as big as you feel" mantra sets out a cheese feast, but Nathan Lane's sarcastic Snowbell keeps grown-ups giggling with catty comments.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
I do not exaggerate in giving this my highest rating. I enjoyed it *that* much.
TheUnknown837-18 May 2010
As of present (May 2010), I have never read the E.B. White classic "Stuart Little," however I have had the delightful privilege to see the two films based loosely upon its content. The first "Stuart Little," released in 1999, was a very sweet and charming little family picture that I enjoyed immensely as a kid and still do to this day. I remember I also enjoyed the sequel, "Stuart Little 2" when I was younger, but now having re-watched the film for the first time in a long time, I discover that a rare instance has occurred: I enjoy the movie more now as an adult than I did when I was eleven. Perhaps it's because I now understand the adult humor and Snowbell's hilarious lines better, but overall, "Stuart Little 2" is a very good picture.

In the sequel, Stuart Little (voiced by Michael J. Fox) now has a quintessential relationship to his family. His human brother George has accepted him as a sibling and the cat Snowbell is now his pal instead of his enemy. However, poor Stuart feels a little left-out in the world because of his small size and his lack of real friends. That is until a little bird named Margolo (voiced by Melanie Griffith) literally drops into his life (from the sky), pursued by a vicious falcon. When they are clear of the evil bird's talons, Stuart and Margolo develop a very strong, very heart-warming friendship while teaching to the younger audience members very important lessons about life and friendship.

Those messages were communicated to be very well when I was younger and they still are today. I'm not exactly sure why I like "Stuart Little 2" more as an adult than I did as a kid, but maybe it's because I can understand the full extent of it. The filmmakers made the right choice to film it as a family picture, incorporating elements that children can understand but leaving in great moments of comedy to keep the adults interested. More so than in the first one, the picture is kept upbeat by the hilarious presence of Snowbell the cat, voiced by Nathan Lane, who has one terrific one-liner after another. A favorite moment of mine is when Snowbell is serving as a tool so Stuart can speak into a payphone. Their time runs out and he asks Snowbell for more change. The cat looks at the mouse standing on his head and cackles out: "What do I look like? A fanny pack?" "Stuart Little 2" is a real treat to look at with some gorgeous cinematography and a deliberately over-painted New York City with everybody in the movie wearing extravagant outfits. The special effects used for Stuart, Margolo, Snowbell, the falcon, and the other animated characters in the film is very good, best exemplified by the eyes of Stuart and Margolo. Their eyes are solid black with no visible pupils, but the animators carefully manipulate the characters' expressions to mirror every emotion that could be asked for from a real-life performer.

Perhaps the best element of "Stuart Little 2" is the change of point-of-view from the first one. In the original film, most of the plot involved the Littles' difficulties in adopting a talking mouse as a child and a great portion of the film was people looking down upon little Stuart. Here, the story takes place on Stuart's level, from his point-of-view, and we come to associate and identify more with him this time around. I also really like Hugh Laurie, Geena Davis, and Jonathan Lipnicki as Stuart's adoptive family, who do a really good job at maintaining the illusion that they are communicating to a two-inch mouse adopted as their son and treating him with loving affection.

But the best scenes are the scenes of Margolo and Stuart, particularly a little scene where they are on a date at a makeshift drive-in movie theater: sitting in Stuart's model car in front of a television, watching Alfred Hitchcock's marvelous 1958 film "Vertigo" which we later learn is a poignant choice as there are some parallels in the relationship between Stuart and his avian companion.

"Stuart Little 2" is a wonderful family film. Some may question my judgment and wonder if I exaggerate just a little in shelling out my highest rating for this film. You may ask: maybe it's good, but is it *that* good? Well, maybe not on some critical scales. But the way I review movies, dissecting and analyzing but more or less reporting how I personally responded, than no, not in the least. I enjoyed "Stuart Little 2" so much, every little second of it was a gem for me, and I more than enthusiastically award it ten stars.
17 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Hey, at least this is better than the first film.
Doctor-Insane19 September 2019
Nothing else to say, other than: Give this one a watch. :)
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
...little hey, little ho.
Pjtaylor-96-13804423 December 2020
'Stuart Little 2 (2002)' is a more straight-forward kid-friendly caper than its predecessor, with several high-flying set-pieces and a stronger focus on the sort of adventures you'd expect from a CG/live-action hybrid. As such, it's actually more entertaining, even if it isn't quite as focused from a narrative point of view. The story is enjoyable enough for what it is and the flick does a good job of making you care about its characters. Nathan Lane as Snowbell is a real highlight; he provides the piece with a lot of its most memorable moments and even provokes a few chuckles along the way. Overall, the affair is a decent effort. It's relatively enjoyable on occasion, but it isn't massively compelling as a whole. 5/10.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fifth Element Meets Accidental Tourist
tedg13 September 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Spoilers herein.

I am really enjoying big kids movies. That's because they are so well engineered -- a little skill in understanding what works adds up to big DVD sales. In this case, we have something that superficially resembles the first film but is actually a beast of a different order.

In this case, the whole purpose of the film is the creation of the world, slightly adjusted from ours a half step toward fantasy. This is all built around Geena Davis, in remarkable red hair and slightly heavy fifties pancake, makeup influenced by Julianne Moore's recent work. She's a really clever actress who finds and communicates a niche that brings the architecture of the thing to life. Watch what she does, and how the score extends everything she says.

The story is only an excuse to keep things moving: but the Leeloo influence in Margalo is strong. Watch the two films together for great fun.

As with recent fare (Pirates, Nemo, Ring, Potter), we have lots of vertical space.

Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed