Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Film Glance Forum

  1. Home
  2. The IMDb Archives
  3. Why did this movie get such a horrible reputation?

Why did this movie get such a horrible reputation?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The IMDb Archives
6 Posts 1 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • F Offline
    F Offline
    fgadmin
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Film and Television Discussion


    csweetleaf2 — 17 years ago(January 25, 2009 11:30 PM)

    Why did this movie get such a horrible reputation? I thought it was a fun and enjoyable movie and I personally liked this movie more than Smokey and the Bandit 2 due to it having more funny parts and it had the lightheartedness of the original and the pacing IMO was better than Smokey 2.
    Plus the chemistry between Junior and Buford was at its best.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • F Offline
      F Offline
      fgadmin
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      k2000kid — 16 years ago(July 17, 2009 10:00 AM)

      I think it's really hard to outdo the original
      and the fact everyone called him the Bandit
      as opposed to just Cletus or Snowman seemed sacrelige

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • F Offline
        F Offline
        fgadmin
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Traianus — 16 years ago(August 08, 2009 02:05 PM)

        It has a worse reputation than Part II largely because 1) Part III looks extremely low budget, 2) Part III's editing is for crap, and most importantly 3) no Burt in Part III (and to a lesser extent, no Sally Fields).
        Other than that, though, no one will ever convince me that Part II is better than Part III. Part III is WAY funnier, does a better job of letting Jackie Gleason do his thing and has a better plot (I know the word "plot" is used loosely when speaking of these films, but let's just say that was better to go with a fish than an elephant for a central theme). There's more action and car-chasing in Part III than in Part II, which gets too bogged down with the Bandit struggling with a clear-conscience over the humanity of an elephant. Smokey and the Bandit films are supposed to be about car chases and good laughs, not animal rights.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • F Offline
          F Offline
          fgadmin
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          jasoncampbell05 — 16 years ago(August 08, 2009 11:31 PM)

          It got this rep because of the cut and paste editing of scenes that were shot with Gleason as "Bandit" and then going back and redoing them w/ Jerry Reed and trying to make it fit in with what was already shot. I think once Universal saw the final cut they knew that it would do what they hoped and just put it out for a few weeks. I know in my town it got a decent first week ad in the paper but that was it.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • F Offline
            F Offline
            fgadmin
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            theroberthawleyexperienc — 16 years ago(August 09, 2009 09:11 AM)

            I second thisim convinced there was Gleason- Bandit footage shotone look at the Bandit stunt double, esp when the Bandit first captures the fish looks like the double should be for Gleason- not Reed

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • F Offline
              F Offline
              fgadmin
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              Woodyanders — 8 months ago(July 30, 2025 12:47 AM)

              Because it's a very crude and poorly made cash grab of a sequel, that's why.
              You've seen Guy Standeven in something because the man was in everything.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0

              • Login

              • Don't have an account? Register

              Powered by NodeBB Contributors
              • First post
                Last post
              0
              • Categories
              • Recent
              • Tags
              • Popular
              • Users
              • Groups