Fierce Creatures - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Fierce Creatures Reviews

Page 1 of 26
August 23, 2018
A pleasant comedy that delivers on a farcical level, boosted enormously by the charisma of John Cleese as well as an over-acting yet delicious Kevin Kline. The humour doesn't win any intelligence awards and can get slightly childish or derivative now and then, yet "Fierce Creatures" remains an above-par, enjoyable hour-and-a-half.
February 4, 2018
A return of the cast from A fish called Wanda but none of the humour.
½ November 17, 2016
A rather ridiculous screwball comedy with great running gags.
October 3, 2016
A funny and wickedly original comedy. More absurdist than FISH CALLED, and nowhere near as tight, but still a delight.
July 12, 2016
Predictable and absurd copy of the classic "A Fish Called Wanda" has nothing new to offer only absurd and forced humor.
June 29, 2016
This is a great film! I can't believe it's got so many poor reviews on here.
April 18, 2016
really dreadfully underrated and very unfairly its more Monty Python than a Fish Called Wanda especially with a brilliant supporting cast and a stronger role for Palin.
January 13, 2016
A Good cast and a good premise but not enough laughs or wit.
Super Reviewer
May 11, 2015
So back in 1988 there was a highly quirky, sexy British crime heist movie with a mix of top cult British and American stars, it was a huge (and surprising) success. Nine years later the same team were back in this sort of sequel, or maybe prequel, no one was really sure. In the end it was just another comedy utilising the same cast, however, the novelisation of the film actually explains how both movies connect, but no one cares about the book so...

The plot is radically different from the 'A Fish Called Wanda', this is not any kind of crime comedy but it still involves unscrupulous people. Its all about John Cleese's character Rollo coming to look after a small typically British zoo of mainly small harmless animals, which he then tries to convert into a zoo full of fierce creatures. He has to do this because the main company he works for (that own the zoo) wants better revenue from the attraction hotspot. Thusly he is instantly at odds with the zoo's team of caring keepers who obviously are against this. At the same time Rollo must contend with Willa Weston and Vince McCain (Jamie Lee Curtis and Kevin Kline) who are overseeing this latest acquisition by the company to make sure it makes money.

You see the problem with this comedy is the fact they have tried to basically remake 'Wanda'. Many of scenes in this film are rehashes from the original and are going for exactly the same laughs, the cast are playing virtually the same kind of characters and in the case of Jamie Lee Curtis her characters name has clearly been made as close as possible to Wanda (Willa). I really don't understand why they have done this because everyone knows this kind of thing hardly ever works, it doesn't matter how grand your cast roster is.

Much of the said cast is of course taken from the first movie, and I don't just mean the main cast either, many smaller roles and cameos feature actors/actresses from the first movie. Does that somehow make things better? are these actors suppose to connect this story to the first movie somehow? Apparently not as this is supposed to be more of a stand alone why use the same cast then?? I mean sure the use of the classic British comedic legend Ronnie Corbett is very nice, a nice addition, but he barely does anything and is clearly there just to ramp up the star meter. Its an all British type affair so lets get some British gems of comedy...yeah OK but at least make use of them, at least make a good film with them.

I mean watching Cleese in this is actually cringeworthy, he's doing all his usual typical funny little quirks he's done his entire career because that's what people expect, but its old hat now. He brings nothing new to the table here which isn't entirely his fault because (like I said) people wanna see that but you gotta try and break the mould guy! In short Cleese is basically Basil Fawlty in charge of a zoo...but not as funny, sweet idea, but like I said its not as funny as it sounds. At the same time watching Cleese trying to act sexy and dashing whilst cuddling up to Curtis (again) is horrible!! its like watching your aging dad trying to be sexy n cool with a younger woman, God no!
As pointed out already Curtis plays the same character again too, a sexual female predator that is after Rollo but has to shake off the ever lurking Vincent (Kline), yet again. This leads to Kline who (as in the first movie) is head and shoulders above the rest giving the best performance. Kline seems to be really really good at playing the brash, pig-headed, egotistical Yank that won't think twice about being a complete shit no matter who's watching. He's rude, arrogant and cruel (yet again) and has his target set on Cleese's character Rollo (yet again), you notice I'm having to type 'yet again' quite often here. Do I have to mention Palin and his character that bares a remarkably close resemblance to his character in 'Wanda'? Nope, its the same character.

Don't get me wrong this isn't a terrible movie, its not all bad, there are some nice moments of farcical humour, just not that much is all. It has everything you'd expect from a naughty British comedy that has two Pythons in it (no not the scaly reptilian kind). Characters running around in their underwear (Cleese again!), lots of sexual double entendres, silly visual gags, pratfalls, slapstick and the odd hint of violence which you of course don't actually see. Thing is, the first movie was a smart, witty, sexy, dark comedy aimed at adults. This movie is a childish, immature, infantile, watered down excuse of a comedy that isn't really aimed at anyone. The kids won't appreciate the performances (or at least what they were aiming for) and there's nothing too visually appealing going on for them either, whilst its way too dumb and soft for adults. There's no point having Jamie Lee Curtis looking all slinky if she's not gonna actually do anything.

I think the idea for a quaint little British zoo battling against corporate suits is fine and has promise, but its been completely squandered here. For the first time ever I would have to say that the shenanigans of both Cleese and Palin actually bored and annoyed me at times. I've never really come across a movie that has tried to pretty much copy its predecessors formula so blatantly. I mean seriously! why would you even watch this when you have the first movie which is exactly the same and so much better.
½ May 8, 2015
The same terrific cast of Wanda with none of the laughs or wit of Wanda..
Super Reviewer
January 1, 2015
I rewatched "A fish called Wanda" quite recently and it was good but not as good as i remembered it. Yesterday i finally saw Fierce Creatures for the first time and with the same cast as "Wanda" it could probably be a nice comedy i thought. The story in this flick is not quite as good but decent enough. But i must say that i actually found this movie to be much funnier and John Cleese shows his best side here. I liked him alot in Fawlty Towers and its almost to watch Basil again with the same type of humor / character in a way. There are more goofy scenes in this flick i would say overall. The rest of the cast did not live up to the same level as John Cleese but still its an entertaining comedy in the end.
October 21, 2014
It's no "Fish Called Wanda" but it's hilarious all the same.
August 24, 2014
I really enjoyed this - I'm sure I saw it as a teenager, but can't remember much about it. Plenty of reality about the corporate takeovers, profit-driven-at-all-costs Rupert Murdoch character (Kline's Aussie accent is pretty ridiculous, but not too inaccurate!). The whole corporatisation of the zoo has plenty of sight gags with the sponsorship & the zookeepers in costume, but the film's at it's best when Cleese & Palin are on screen together - their Monty Python-honed repartee is impossible to beat. Great cast - Lee Curtis & Corbett too! - fast-paced, plenty of misunderstandings/mishaps and lots of laughs.
August 17, 2014
(First and only viewing - December 2009)
½ March 15, 2014
Oh boy. This was so bad. I kept waiting for that laugh out loud moment, and it never came. I actually feel embarrassed that I watched it. John Cleese, Kevin Kline, and Jamie Lee Curtis?? What were you all thinking? Oh bad.
March 6, 2014
Riotously funny from start to finish, this mislead sequel/spinoff to "A Fish Called Wanda" benefits from the hilarious performances of its well-known cast including John Cleese, Jamie Lee Curtis and Kevin Kline.
January 15, 2014
A kind of follow up to the amazing A Fish Called Wanda, this new film reunites the whole cast of the Wanda film for another crazy story. This time it's about a zoo. Well any story is fine by me because the cast is so great & the alchemy between them so obviously fun , you could sit through anything they do it would turn out interesting. A step down from Wanda though this comedy was hammered by critics back then but i can assure you it's a good film & it's funny.
December 26, 2013
An enjoyable comedy that reunites A Gish Called Wanda's winning team.
November 26, 2013
Slightly close to the whole Monty Python's nonsense package, slightly better than A Fish Called Wanda in my opinion, Fierce Creatures is a nonstop comedy. It isn't as brilliant as Python's original work because it doesn't have such an awesome storyline, but with these comedy masterminds, there's no need for one to have a great movie.
November 21, 2013
"Fierce Creatures" acts as John Cleese's follow-up to the smash comedy "A Fish Called Wanda", and many of the elements are still there (notably the acting talents of Cleese, Jamie Lee Curtis, Kevin Kline and Michael Palin) but it feels slightly less fresh this time around, although that certainly doesn't preclude it from being a very funny film.

Kline is once again the stand-out actor from amongst the foursome, with his dual role as an American heir to a company, and his inexplicably New Zealander father (an obvious parody of Australian mogul Rupert Murdoch). And, also like "Wanda", not enough praise is given to Palin's role as a fast-talking zookeeper with a fondness for tarantulas.

Despite all this, there's no ultimately iconic scene, like the shooting of the dogs/John Cleese speaking Russian while naked/Michael Palin with chips up his nose scenes from Wanda. There are, however, nods to previous works of Cleese, including Cleese accidentally calling Curtis "Wanda", and Monty Python references (a spectator at a sea lion show was described as having "beautiful plumage", and John Cleese's daughter utters the line "It's only a flesh wound")

Also appearing are comedy legend Ronnie Corbett, and in the background, Jack Davenport makes his screen debut.

A fun movie, but nothing on Cleese's usual standard.
Page 1 of 26