Basic Instinct 2

Columbia Pictures | Release Date: March 31, 2006

2.9	USER SCORE Generally unfavorable reviews based on 138 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

Steven1981Mar 19, 2020

Nowhere near as good as the original which was an excellent film..... Basic Instinct 2, apparently came out in 2006 but I can't remember to be honest. It's a thriller/mystery/erotic by very little kind of a movie and the sequel to the 1992Nowhere near as good as the original which was an excellent film..... Basic Instinct 2, apparently came out in 2006 but I can't remember to be honest. It's a thriller/mystery/erotic by very little kind of a movie and the sequel to the 1992 original Basic Instinct with Michael Douglas and Sharon Stone. Strangely enough Michael Caton-Jones made the sequel instead of Paul Verhoeven and Michael Caton-Jones I think also directed The Jackal with Bruce Willis and Richard Gere...... Anyway, Basic Instinct 2 opens with Sharon Stone speeding around in her car at night with what seems to be a drugged up Stan Collymore in the passenger seat. I don't know 100% if he was drugged or drunk but he didn't look very well so something was wrong with him. Anyway they are doing naughty things in the car and Sharon Stone drives her car into the water, leaves Collymore to die and saves herself. In the next scene we see Sharon Stone I think being questioned and she eventually ends up seeing some psychiatrist or specialist or something named Michael Glass (David Morrissey). In parts of the conversation throughout the film Sharon Stone who plays Catherine Tramell mentions sex in one form or another to Michael Glass. The conversations at times are a bit awkward and David Morrissey as Michael Glass is annoying, dull and quite basically a terrible character who wasn't really needed. The storyline isn't as good as the original and the sex scenes are not as good as the original and the film feels more gloomier and the colour used in the film feels darker and limited whereas the original felt more brighter and colourful. There's a few death scenes but none are impressive and Sharon Stone is awful as Catherine Tramell but in the original she was young, hot, sexy, attractive, tough, clever but in Basic Instinct 2 she looks like she's a 50+ year old trying to act young and look hot but fails. She still looks beautiful in Basic Instinct 2 but not a scratch on her role in the original and David Morrissey was terrible in Basic Instinct 2 and can't act to save his own life and Michael Douglas is a much better actor. Sharon Stone was much better in the original and in Basic Instinct 2 all these horrible characters who are unlikeable keep cropping up throughout the movie such as the dude who keeps questioning David Morrissey, some detective dude who gets killed by Morrissey later in the movie. The nudity and sex scenes are unimpressive, the directing could of been better, horrible use of colour in the movie with dull colours over and over, Catherine Tramell (Sharon Stone) looks terrible and is annoying at times and so is Michael Glass (David Morrissey) , the death scenes suck and the movies polluted with band characters who nobody cares about throughout the film and some of the dialogue is cheesey, annoying, rubbish, stupid and and silly... Sharon Stone smokes a cigarette in nearly every scene which is not a good role model to other women... Sharon Stone as Catherine Tramell in Basic Instinct 2 and David Morrissey aren't that impressive and Basic Instinct 2 sinks like Tramell's car at the beginning of the movie because it's an awful film and not the worst film but bad enough. If you liked the original 1992 Basic Instinct my advice is don't ever watch Basic Instinct 2 because it's not that good and rather disappointing!… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

juliankennedy23Jun 30, 2014

Basic Instinct 2: 4 out of 10: I understand the urge of some to declare this a guilty pleasure. After all the entire movie is fascinatingly ridiculous. Sharon Stone's character from the first film has turned into a tour de force caricature.Basic Instinct 2: 4 out of 10: I understand the urge of some to declare this a guilty pleasure. After all the entire movie is fascinatingly ridiculous. Sharon Stone's character from the first film has turned into a tour de force caricature. Yes she is too old to play the role but as written I can't think of any other actress who could play it either.

The idea that any of the characters would find her so appealing that they would jettison any shred of common sense out of the window is nuts. It's not so much the physical as mental. Her character screams look at me I am psychotic. Now certainly some of us have been guilty of being seduced by a patently psychotic middle aged nymphomaniac, but alcohol and late hours not to mention a dimly lit bar are usually involved. To be seduced by such a creature in the sober light of day is pure science fiction.

Indeed every character in the movie seems inexplicably smitten in one way or the other by Stone. I can buy one disturbed and naive character such as the baby faced psychiatrist going nuts over her but his ex-wife and her lover as well? The movie has other faults as well. There really isn't all that much sex and it does drag at times. And while beautifully shot the lack of cohesive story and supposed twists are more yawn inducing than shocking.

Certainly the film is worth a look just for Stone's over the top performance but don't be surprised if you check your watch while shaking your head in disbelief.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

TonyB.Jun 19, 2007

Not nearly as bad as many critics hoped it would be, "Basic Instinct 2" moves along at a decent pace. Unfortunately, where it winds up is questionable. I would like an example of the"unintentionally hilarious dialog" that some say is to be Not nearly as bad as many critics hoped it would be, "Basic Instinct 2" moves along at a decent pace. Unfortunately, where it winds up is questionable. I would like an example of the"unintentionally hilarious dialog" that some say is to be found here.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

DazAug 29, 2006

Really enjoyed it. It wasn't as good as the first but what mattered for me was that i enjoyed the film. It didn't hurt that Sharon Stone looked AMAZING.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

VictorG.Aug 28, 2006

Watched it 2 times. First time was ok. 2nd time, I listened more and it was very good. Some times it was a bit much, but that's the director...not Sharon. The international touch was great! Trammel has sold a lot of books. Watched it 2 times. First time was ok. 2nd time, I listened more and it was very good. Some times it was a bit much, but that's the director...not Sharon. The international touch was great! Trammel has sold a lot of books. Lastly...Sharon looks great and appears to be aging well. She has a great look. I would have loved to have her on my arm years ago and even more so now.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

GeorgeS.Aug 22, 2006

Brutal... couldn't sit threw it. Turned if off about 45 minutes in.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

HansB.Aug 14, 2006

Sharon Stone is delightful to watch. The story was so so. The therapist was a bit unbelievable.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

AlexV.Jul 30, 2006

I think the reviewers all jumped on the bandwagon, i.e. it's OK to trash Sharon Stone. And a sequel? Even more reason. This movie was not bad at all, I was expecting some flop of a movie. And Sharon's still got it, she looks great. I think the reviewers all jumped on the bandwagon, i.e. it's OK to trash Sharon Stone. And a sequel? Even more reason. This movie was not bad at all, I was expecting some flop of a movie. And Sharon's still got it, she looks great. No one does the mean, mind-warped female character like she does. I don't know why I was comparing to Match Point, maybe because it takes place in London, but this was better than Match Point.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

AaronB.Jul 18, 2006

This movie isn't horrible. Well, yes, it is. But listen . . . this might be a movie for you if you want to sit down and have a guilty pleasure. Sharon Stone works what she's got, and she's still got 'it'. She does This movie isn't horrible. Well, yes, it is. But listen . . . this might be a movie for you if you want to sit down and have a guilty pleasure. Sharon Stone works what she's got, and she's still got 'it'. She does what she can with the most laughable dialogue I have witnessed on screen in years. The supporting actors try to take themselves seriously, and do a decent job when all is said and done. This movie is bad, but it's not that bad. In fact, it is almost good. Well . . . almost.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

MichaelH.Jul 15, 2006

I loved it. It was unsettling. I guess it's becasue I know the character in this movie. SHe not a killer just a beaty who loves to mind f... people.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

MikeT.Jul 12, 2006

This movie sucks. Not even comparablle to the original Basic Instinct.

1 of 1 users found this helpful

DanielR.Jun 30, 2006

I'm at complete odds with the critics on this one. I thought BI 2 was a very well done movie. Sharon Stone has still got it, and while there may be some clique plot points, they manage to out a frsh twist on them.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

RalphD.Apr 7, 2006

It must be me! Never have I been in such total disagreement with almost all the professional reviewers. I found the film intriguing fun, Sharon Stone luscious, and the supporting characters uniformly engaging. Maybe even an 8, on reconsideration.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

SwankApr 7, 2006

Great movie for a first date....

0 of 0 users found this helpful

ZsoltV.Apr 6, 2006

Bad script, horrible movie...

0 of 1 users found this helpful

[Anonymous]Apr 5, 2006

BI2 isn't nearly as bad as I expected. It's entertaining at all times, and has a plot that makes you think (seriously).

0 of 0 users found this helpful

EmyN.Apr 4, 2006

Bad film, good topless actress.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

LouisB.Apr 4, 2006

Sharon is a little over the top at times, but she steals just about every scene. Worth one's time.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

AaronG.Apr 3, 2006

Bar none, the absolute worst movie I have ever seen in my entire life, ever. Here's the kick: Sharon Stone...again is fabulous, brilliant and dead-on as Tramell...and again Stone is the best actress working in bad movies today.

1 of 1 users found this helpful

TomApr 2, 2006

The problem is with the director, of all the directors this idiot had to do the movie..what a terrible location he did it in. Awful!

0 of 1 users found this helpful

MattD.Apr 1, 2006

I was expecting much, much worse. Sharon Stone is okay, but her face looks lumpy and weird from too much botox. Overally the moview doesn't suck, but it's kinda boring.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

TonyM.Apr 1, 2006

Brutal.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

JohnA.Mar 30, 2006

Sharon is incredible!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

GlynnH.Mar 30, 2006

Not as good as the first but Sharon is back in top form and gives us the Catherine that we love to hate.

0 of 0 users found this helpful