FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Limerculer A waste of 90 minutes of my life

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

SnoopyStyle Nim (Bindi Irwin) and her father Jack Rusoe (Matthew Lillard) are on the island doing biological research with their nerdy assistant Felix. Jack's father-in-law Grant informs them that developers are planning to build a resort on the island. Nim comes up with the idea to find three endangered species to save the island while her father goes back to the mainland to present to the government. Edmund runaways from his bickering parents and hires a boat to go back to the island. Booker and his sons Ben and Frankie operate the boat.The actors are all new from the original. I don't want to be mean-spirited but Bindi Irwin is limited as an actress. She still fits the role in some sense. She brings her myopic focus on nature and she's pretty good at being a grumpy teenager. She and Toby Wallace have fun hate to start the teenie rom-com. However, her acting cannot take it any further. The poaching family is bothersome and takes the movie into the wrong direction. Whatever potential this movie started with is gone after the first half.

jeff-59976 I thought the first movie was interesting and fun to watch. But this one was not quite as good. First of all it is basically a stripped down version of the first one in that the first one integrates into the story a "fictional" character, Alex Rover, from Alexandria's novels. But nothing like that is done here. Also they wrote out Alexandria. In the first movie she added an extra dynamic to the movie because we got to see how her agoraphobia played out in contrast to Nim's adventurism. I don't recall for sure but I believe Alexandria hit it off with Jack but in the new movie it is like, where did she go?Though the two movies have some continuity, it is obvious that there is some that is missing. For instance there are completely new actors portraying the characters. In the first movie both Nim and Jack spoke with an American accent. But in the 2nd movie, Jack speaks with one but Nim has sort of a British accent. That makes the story unbelievable when you have seen the first one. Especially considering that Jack is Nim's father. What happened between the two movies? Did Nim go live in the UK for a while?If you have seen the first one, you will probably end up putting it in either part way through or after you see this one. But if you haven't seen the first one, then I think you would like this one. It's not a bad movie at all. Just disappointing that they didn't make it as interesting or really build on the previous one.

cleargraphics I knew this sequel was made for a TV/DVD release only and not for a theatrical release so, they used affordable unknown actors. But, Bindi Irwin is not an unknown, of course. Steve Erwin was not quite the film actor that his daughter has turned out to be. She was a good child actress in in the Free Willy: Escape from Pirate's Cove movie. But, in Return to Nim's Island, Bindi is a very capable adolescent actress with real theatrical film talent. Her Mom was very natural in front of a TV camera and Steve's acting style was mainly ramping up his enthusiasm and volume when doing Animal Planet. Maybe Bindi has the best of both parents in her acting ability. I knew this was not a real sequel, not bringing back any of the original Nim's Island actors but, this was a fresh sassy Australian produced alternative sequel to Nim's Island. Well done!

clairestruthers Apart from the presence of the wonderful Jodie Foster, the first Nim's Island had a well written, original plot with genuine tension and excitement. This sequel is a tedious, predictable load of trite nonsense, with cardboard cut-out characters, an almost complete absence of acting and plastic animals. Okay, the animals are real, but the sets are not. The plot (such as it is) is constructed entirely as a vehicle for Bindi Irwin, which ignores the unfortunate fact that Bindi could not act her way out of a three-sided room if she tried (which she doesn't, noticeably). She recites her lines as if from an autocue and has two stock expressions - sulky and slightly less sulky. Her love interest (eek - her character and his are aged 14!) is a rather more accomplished actor than she is, but presumably he had to audition for the part, while she obviously didn't. Matthew Lillard, who plays her father, never got out of first gear, and nor did the awfully naughty bad guys - who predictably got what was coming to them in the end (including, naturally, piles of bird poo on their heads). It was an afternoon I'll never get back, but at least I was able to catch up surreptitiously on Facebook ...