I have yet to have a good experience with an ironic sequel to a terrible first movie. BIRDEMIC is legendarily awful and not in a way that makes it watchable either. It's laughable in small doses for its sheer incompetence in terms of staging, directing, lighting, acting, and especially the visual effects. The film's badness gave rise to some degree of popularity among the general public.

So how'd the sequel happen? My assumption was a combination of money director Nguyen made off sales of the first film coupled with enough people out there who saw promise in making a so-bad-it's GREAT film to advance their careers or be part of history in making something monumentally terrible on purpose?

And the results? I'd be exaggerating to label it as even spectacularly underwhelming. It's just forgettable and dull with few laughs to be found.

It's as though they forgot that what made the first film watchable were the moments of sheer stupidity, like the awkward staging and bizarre choices the director made. Here, all of that is gone. The movie looks a lot slicker and more professional and the acting isn't -much- better, though still better enough to not differentiate it from millions of other low budget horror movies. It really exists solely as a test of patience. The nightclub scene in Avalon takes way too much screen time, as does all the location visiting around L.A. They could not have been much less creative, only in adding zombies and cavemen at a stage in the movie where there wasn't really much else that could have been done.

So I wonder, can a good-bad movie be made on-purpose? I've heard similar negative buzz about SAMURAI COP 2 and can't imagine it fares much better. At least the first Samurai Cop had some entertaining action sprinkled in there. BIRDEMIC 1 was terrible in every way, and BIRDEMIC 2 manages to be even worse.