New Line Cinema | Release Date: February 18, 2005
6.1
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 284 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
160
Mixed:
11
Negative:
113
WATCH NOW
Buy On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
0
PatP.Feb 17, 2005
Crappy movie.
4 of 4 users found this helpful
3
GavinCJul 27, 2009
Childish, unfunny, and boring.
4 of 4 users found this helpful
0
JamesS.May 15, 2010
This movie stinks! Where's Jim Carrey?!
3 of 3 users found this helpful
1
MovieLonely94Oct 30, 2010
whats the purpose of this movie? it missed the presence of Jim Carrey from the original. this is by far the worst.
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
0
a.f.Feb 14, 2005
I believe the question is why?
2 of 2 users found this helpful
1
JohnC.Jul 10, 2007
The worst movie I have ever seen. Not funny, lame, and Jamie Kennedy needs to realize he is not Jim Carrey and he cannot attempt the same slap stick humor it just looks so bad that you almost feel sorry for the poor looser.
2 of 2 users found this helpful
0
JackM.Feb 16, 2005
$100,000,000 The figure you see above is what New Line Cinema paid to make this horrendously inept piece of garbage posing as family entertainment. It's downright insulting, not only to the audience that pays to see this, but also to $100,000,000 The figure you see above is what New Line Cinema paid to make this horrendously inept piece of garbage posing as family entertainment. It's downright insulting, not only to the audience that pays to see this, but also to every struggling screenwriter or director with a dream to make a movie that fails. To think that studio upon studio regularly turns down scripts that are a thousand times greater than this, and which would probably cost only a fraction of the cost to make, while this gets greenlighted -- well, it's enough to make you lose faith altogether. Just to show you how stupefying it is for a movie company to throw this kind of coinage at such a superfluous sequel -- the original film, The Mask, only grossed $120 million domestically. That film had a red-hot Jim Carrey. This film has Jamie Kennedy. That film cost only $18 million to make. This film will be lucky to make even that. Jamie Kennedy (Malibu's Most Wanted, Bug) stars as struggling cartoonist Tim Avery, whose dog finds the Mask of Loki and which Tim ends up sporting at a company function. The Mask makes the wearer become a live-action cartoon character, which is perfect for inspiring the cartoonist, who soon sees a promotion come his way for the spectacle he performs in front of his bosses. Meanwhile, Tim's doting wife (Traylor Howard, "Bram & Alice") pressures him into a baby, which just happens to have been conceived while the mask was in full swing, giving the young child all of the powers of the mask. All the while, Loki (Cumming, X2), the god of mischief himself, is in search of his long-lost mask, going from baby to baby, trying to find the owner so that he might recover it. I came into Son of the Mask with about the lowest expectations one could have for a movie, and needless to say, I came out of it still flabbergasted at just how dismal an experience it truly is. Astonishing is perhaps the only way I can describe it, as I sat in amazement, mouth agape, witnessing one of the most grandiose wastes of time, money and energy to ever get a wide theatrical release. There is almost no story to the movie at all. It seems that the only game plan behind any of it was to throw as many special effects at the audience as possible, hoping we will be dazzled enough to ignore the fact that there is no tangible plot or story cohesion. Wave after wave of special effects fill the screen, but even this move backfires, as they are some of the most repugnantly rendered, childishly conceived, and abominably executed visuals you may actually see this year. Yes, I do realize it is supposed to be an emulation of a cartoon, but watching talking and dancing babies borders on the grotesque, with a level of bad taste that will have you retching. In one final insult, the MPAA has blessed this travesty with a PG rating, almost ensuring that families looking to take their children to a film for everyone will flock to it. How much of the $100 million went to pay off the ratings board? This movie's only attempts at humor are of the bodily function variety. Watch a young boy piss in his father's face. Watch the same young boy spew vomit all over the inside windshield. Listen to the sounds of Jamie Kennedy overwhelm Alan Cumming with kung fu flatulence. More sweet sounds are heard when baby makes poop in his diapers -- quite loudly. A woman's head is converted into a large nose, and she sneezes mucus out on someone. Watch the people in the audience around you vomit all over the theater floor simultaneously. Son of the Mask is a tedious and utterly revolting way to spend 86 minutes, and even if they paid you $7.50 to see it, instead of the other way around, it wouldn't be worth it. Using your money as toilet paper would be putting it to better use (well, maybe not the 50 cent part, but you know what I mean), and would save you from wasting quite a bit of cumulative time for you and your family. Take them to the park -- it's free, and will leave you in far better spirits -- and use what you save to buy or rent the original film instead. This film doesn't deserve a penny of your money, it deserves a vasectomy, if only to be sure no chances of having any more offspring to pollute theaters with again. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful
1
JmsbppAug 6, 2013
solo por un pequeño momento de risas el uno pero lo demas es un cero efectos animados muy malos chistes absurdos para lo que era la mascara de Jim Carrey
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
2
VinceH.Feb 28, 2005
I don't see what the big fuss is. Yes this is a terrible movie, but certainly not as bad as Alone in the Dark or The Wedding Date, which were both more painful than this. The director keeps the pace lively enough that the film never I don't see what the big fuss is. Yes this is a terrible movie, but certainly not as bad as Alone in the Dark or The Wedding Date, which were both more painful than this. The director keeps the pace lively enough that the film never gets boring, but the crappy CGI-animation, Bob Hoskins in a wildly obvious I-need-to-pay-next-months-rent role, and the usually great Alan Cumming reduced to a silly cartoon are all enough reasons to skip this turkey. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
RingoS.Mar 7, 2005
This is a steaming pile of garbage.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
JubyBubyFeb 16, 2005
The worst film of all time? Could be! It makes the "Police Academy" films look funny.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
1
JimH.Feb 17, 2005
Junk!
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
JohnN.Feb 17, 2005
Don't waste your time or money.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
3
ChadS.Feb 21, 2005
In "Son of the Mask". there's a cute baby and a dog; and, oh, references to "The Exorcist" and Gerald Scarfe's animation in "Pink Floyd; The Wall". This sequel to the highly successful Jim Carrey vehicle recalls Joe Dante's In "Son of the Mask". there's a cute baby and a dog; and, oh, references to "The Exorcist" and Gerald Scarfe's animation in "Pink Floyd; The Wall". This sequel to the highly successful Jim Carrey vehicle recalls Joe Dante's segment for "The Twilight Zone" movie, in which, cartoon violence is depicted in reality. With another soundtrack, and a different interpretation of this material, "Son of the Mask" could easily be a horror movie. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
[Anonymous]Feb 21, 2005
The fact that people actually went to this movie and thought it might be good is so sad that I have lost all hope for humanity. Come on, Son of Mask!?
1 of 1 users found this helpful
1
BitBurnMar 14, 2005
Totally retarded and dumb. What a waste of money.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
KKApr 21, 2005
By far......the WORST movie I ever saw. It was physically painful for me to sit in my seat and after 25 minutes, my children (3 and 8-year olds) wouldn't even sit through it......nuff said.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
2
NecoMay 20, 2005
Don't watch it and for heavens sake don't buy the DVD!!!
1 of 1 users found this helpful
1
SamJun 16, 2005
Anyone that likes this is lying. They got payed 50 grand by the people that made this monstrosity, so they're now bankrupt since they lost so much on this treachous, backstabbing, moronic sequel. In a way it's dissapointing, but Anyone that likes this is lying. They got payed 50 grand by the people that made this monstrosity, so they're now bankrupt since they lost so much on this treachous, backstabbing, moronic sequel. In a way it's dissapointing, but not in the way like i was expecting much (which i didn't), but it's dissapointing because the mask was a great film and they ruined it with that moron Jamie Kennedy. Boo to all thos involved with this, BOOOOOOOOOOOO! (Take that film threat fer dissin' Chamber of Secrets.) Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
LoganHSep 12, 2006
I watched this movie hoping that there would be some sign of JIm Carry, but sadly no.The special effects sucked, and what was up with Jamie Kennedy's face when he put it on. Worst movie I have ever seen
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
xxhopingtearsxxApr 29, 2007
To make a sequel to the Mask, you must include Jim Carrey. Or else, it just wont be the sequel to the Mask.. Pitiful.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
3
UghLeeMay 30, 2007
I love how there are either 10s or 1's as people's score. You don't see any 5s or 6s... which means you either love or hate it. i hate it. Maybe would have been ok if i was 15 years younger.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
JimL.Feb 16, 2005
Son of the mask is pure garbage. The director Lawrence Guterman is using it to advance kidde porno. He is disgusting.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
1
JimFeb 25, 2005
This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. It lacked any kind of imagination and had verry littl directional focus. I found myself thinking where is this goign? more than once.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
1
SallyP.Mar 24, 2005
This movie was the most boring movie that I have ever, in my life, had to sit through. A complete watse of time.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
toshiro3000May 16, 2005
Are all the positive reviewers here paid employees [or, worse, unpaid interns]? let's see a show of hands. I figured as much.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
DMay 24, 2005
A witless and vulgar sequel.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
DevinB.Jun 12, 2005
Irredeemably awful and brainless sequel. I would also like to speculate that the positive comments here are being posted by paid studio employees, I find it very hard to believe that real people with actual free will or the capacity to think Irredeemably awful and brainless sequel. I would also like to speculate that the positive comments here are being posted by paid studio employees, I find it very hard to believe that real people with actual free will or the capacity to think critically could enjoy such drudgery. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
2
KadeemluvmusicSep 26, 2012
It's very uncool, man. Not cool at all. Son of the Mask is beyond a shadow of a doubt one of the worst sequels of the decade. This movie may just mock Jim Carrey's absence and it nearly failed every minute of it. I love the original MaskIt's very uncool, man. Not cool at all. Son of the Mask is beyond a shadow of a doubt one of the worst sequels of the decade. This movie may just mock Jim Carrey's absence and it nearly failed every minute of it. I love the original Mask where Carrey plays a talkable Frank Sinatra or Don Corleone-like character that likes to have fun and cause so much trouble. That was one of my favorite Jim Carrey movies of all time. I certainly don't know and don't care who casts a sequel to The Mask. Jamie Kennedy, he's a great actor from the Scream movies and Malibu's Most Wanted as a white rapper that sorta look like Eminem. But playing the lead role in Son of The Mask just made a terrible example of how stupid a director should be putting this from a good-old fashion PG-13 movie for adults to bringing a family-friendly kiddie version that is still unwatchable. Maybe it's time for a reboot. Maybe it's about time we need Jim Carrey to bring back the Mask, the type of role that made him a comedic megastar just like Ace Ventura and so on. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
0
0987Mar 11, 2013
This is a disaster movie, i don't like it!!!!!!!!!!! The Mask with Jim Carrey was much better than this part of mask!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
1
diogomendesNov 9, 2014
"Son of the Mask" mostly looks like an horror movie due to the absence of Jim Carrey, cartoonish CGI, unfunny jokes, wooden performances and disgusting slapstick.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
0
NormF.Oct 13, 2007
It's not often you see a movie with all special effects and no script but this is it.
2 of 3 users found this helpful
0
FrankS.Nov 10, 2007
An 8 out 10...an 8 out of 10!!!??? If their was any proof that America's IQ is going down the crapper, one can look no farther than the poor souls that gave this an 8 or higher. A movie directed with all the subtlety of a jackhammer and An 8 out 10...an 8 out of 10!!!??? If their was any proof that America's IQ is going down the crapper, one can look no farther than the poor souls that gave this an 8 or higher. A movie directed with all the subtlety of a jackhammer and wit of Pauly Shore...It is pure garbage. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
0
SethBDec 6, 2009
Films are getting more and more awful by the second and this film is no exception. Its one of those films that is shot nealry entirly with a fish bowl lens and extreme closeups. The effects were awful, the acting was horrific, and the Films are getting more and more awful by the second and this film is no exception. Its one of those films that is shot nealry entirly with a fish bowl lens and extreme closeups. The effects were awful, the acting was horrific, and the cinemography story and everything else was so horid. How this got a rating of 7.8 from users is way beyond me. This film falls under the category of AVOID AT ALL COSTS! Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
EpicLadySpongeJan 7, 2016
How in the world did this get away with a 6.3 user score and how come there are more positive ratings than negative ratings? This is a shameful sequel to the best Mask movie everyone will see.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
1
steveMApr 20, 2005
Who are all these people giving this movie 10? I suspect it is the same studio person as the writing style is very similar. How desperate!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
sonicphotoDec 11, 2005
Son of the mask just doesn't quite cut it with the absense of Jim Carrey and the fact that is more based on the kid's crazy stuff then the actual mask. Is not a bad thing but some jokes feel old and overall the plot and story are Son of the mask just doesn't quite cut it with the absense of Jim Carrey and the fact that is more based on the kid's crazy stuff then the actual mask. Is not a bad thing but some jokes feel old and overall the plot and story are too bland. Kids could find good things here and there but teenagers and adults won't find that much enjoyment on this one. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
AllyD.Feb 14, 2005
Sucked! I got free tickets and I feel like I wasted 90 minutes of my time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
PixarloverMar 12, 2013
Anybody who says ANYTHING positive about the movie CLEARLY HAVE NOT SEEN THE MOVIE!!!!

They're just trolls trying to give a positive reception. They're losers who are ruining Metacritic and the scope of human internet user knowledge.
Anybody who says ANYTHING positive about the movie CLEARLY HAVE NOT SEEN THE MOVIE!!!!

They're just trolls trying to give a positive reception. They're losers who are ruining Metacritic and the scope of human internet user knowledge.

This movie is just flat out awful from start to finish.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
dante_finnJun 28, 2014
This is a bad movie. When it tries tp be funny ot just gets really creepy. This is one of the worst films ever made.And this film is much more family-friendly oriented and the tone is much lighter and comical. Infact Ben Stien's personalityThis is a bad movie. When it tries tp be funny ot just gets really creepy. This is one of the worst films ever made.And this film is much more family-friendly oriented and the tone is much lighter and comical. Infact Ben Stien's personality of his character explains how I was during the movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
Compi24Nov 28, 2012
I would call this movie an "overtly feverish onslaught of frivolity", but I'm afraid that after watching this movie, I'm no longer intelligent enough to use such words. Bad, bad movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
Rox22Sep 29, 2013
While the movie does have a few redeeming points, I do find the movie just tries too much and too hard. Ultimately ruining itself. The potential is there, and the premise is an OK one that fits the narrative. But the execution is justWhile the movie does have a few redeeming points, I do find the movie just tries too much and too hard. Ultimately ruining itself. The potential is there, and the premise is an OK one that fits the narrative. But the execution is just horrific. How the actors could walk onto the set each day and not feel ashamed, is beyond me. I'm assuming the entire production staff were a LSD test group, making a movie on the side.

Overall:
If I didn't know any better, I would have thought the movie was written directed and produced by a 5 year old. A pointless waste of a movie.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
ORCSandDRAGONSJan 26, 2014
CHRIST! The movie at times feels like it is actually trying to kill you. SO many disturbing CGI images. I don't see how any child could watch this and not get nightmares. I feel icky after seeing it....
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
SuperheroMoviesAug 5, 2013
A trite, annoying sequel to the funny original that is sorely lacking the presence of the original Mask, Jim Carrey. It may entertain the smallest demanding audiences, but it will disturb all others.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
FreedomFightersNov 1, 2016
Oftentimes, a film you enjoyed as a kid won't be nearly as good of a watch when you are older. "Son of the Mask" embodies this. Believe it or not, I once enjoyed this film. Nowadays, though, I see just how unfunny, poorly-acted andOftentimes, a film you enjoyed as a kid won't be nearly as good of a watch when you are older. "Son of the Mask" embodies this. Believe it or not, I once enjoyed this film. Nowadays, though, I see just how unfunny, poorly-acted and poorly-designed the film really is. Though it may have potential as a diversion during "Bad Movie Night," this is one you'll generally want to skip. It's simply not worth watching. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
moviematthewNov 8, 2013
"Son Of The Mask" is the worst movie of all time to me. It scared the daylights out of me when it first came out back in 2005. If I was told I had to review this movie for a newspaper, I would turn it down, because there is absolutely no way"Son Of The Mask" is the worst movie of all time to me. It scared the daylights out of me when it first came out back in 2005. If I was told I had to review this movie for a newspaper, I would turn it down, because there is absolutely no way I am going to see "Son Of The Mask" without my plush Twilight Sparkle or without closing my eyes every second. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
warrenworldMay 2, 2014
The second sequel to a Jim Carrey film which doesn't feature Jim Carrey serves as a reminder to always practice safe sex. Even an cartoonish alternate personality can get you pregnant.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
awesomefastguyJul 18, 2014
A note for anyone make a sequel to a film. Step one: keep the lead actor. Step two: keep the same writer. Step three: keep the same director. Step four: keep the same age rating.

These are the ways to not horrifically mess up a
A note for anyone make a sequel to a film. Step one: keep the lead actor. Step two: keep the same writer. Step three: keep the same director. Step four: keep the same age rating.

These are the ways to not horrifically mess up a sequel. Every single one of my golden rules were broken and the result was this badly made, unfunny, stupidly acted waste of money. There are two mildly amusing moments involving the baby that stopped this rating being 0, but there is still no point whatsoever is watching this film.

If you liked 'The Mask', don't watch this movie. If you like comedy, don't watch this movie. If you like life, don't watch this movie!
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
evokingsAug 15, 2014
Oh no not this movie, it was likely the worst movie many people ever saw and In my opinion is really nothing like the instant classic Jim Carey movie The Mask, it seemed like this movie was aimed somewhere in between adults and children, butOh no not this movie, it was likely the worst movie many people ever saw and In my opinion is really nothing like the instant classic Jim Carey movie The Mask, it seemed like this movie was aimed somewhere in between adults and children, but everyone behind the movie kept forgetting which one he/her was trying to please.
as a result, you will see loony tunes like scenes in this movie, dumb childish dialog, and then unintentional scary imagery, guns here and there etc. I put all that in the back of my mind for a moment and reviewed the movie as just a movie by itself, and I cant find a really good story or any real redeeming factors worth waiting for throughout the 94 minutes of pain this movie is.

if you want to watch the worst movie made in the last decade this would be on any hard core movie goers list of worst movies...
I really hated the acting, the script... [well let me save you readers time] the whole movie felt like the whole production team behind it was torturing me...[I'm most likely not the only one who felt this way] this movie is like bad everything only a handful of things are even passable in the film.
please get Jim Carey back and make a real sequel and proudly call it THE MASK 2
Collapse
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
TheDude-Jun 13, 2015
this movie is awful with bad cgi stupid plot horrible acting and dialogue and is way to dumb!! this is easily the 2nd worst movie of all time under cat in the hat
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
SAVJul 31, 2015
Uscito ben undici anni dopo l'originale The Mask che tanto divertì il pubblico a metà degli anni 90, questo Son of the Mask è un filmetto per famiglie che non ha nulla a che vedere con il suo fortunato prequel. Il protagonista non è più loUscito ben undici anni dopo l'originale The Mask che tanto divertì il pubblico a metà degli anni 90, questo Son of the Mask è un filmetto per famiglie che non ha nulla a che vedere con il suo fortunato prequel. Il protagonista non è più lo spassoso Jim Carrey ma un anonimo Jamie Kennedy, gli attori recitano in modo scialbo, l'ironia maliziosa ha ceduto il posto ad un senso dell'umorismo molto infantile e la trama non è nulla di particolarmente memorabile. Un sequel decisamente mal riuscito. Un vero peccato. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
EOB900Aug 25, 2015
Just gonna keep this short this is in my top 10 worst of all time list Yeah its that bad and thats a fact
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
FuturedirectorApr 9, 2016
Does Son of the Mask works with its predesesor? Does it show unforgettable characters? Is it shocking? Is it amazing and enjoyable? Or it has great interpretations? Is it funny and logic? Does it give a message? ... ??? Well, we just gottaDoes Son of the Mask works with its predesesor? Does it show unforgettable characters? Is it shocking? Is it amazing and enjoyable? Or it has great interpretations? Is it funny and logic? Does it give a message? ... ??? Well, we just gotta say. NO!!!! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
Cinemassacre94Mar 20, 2016
The law of diminishing returns dictates that sequels to bad movies are the worst movies of all, because the producers are not only working to rebottle the original non-magic, they're inevitably doomed to come up short. Even by thoseThe law of diminishing returns dictates that sequels to bad movies are the worst movies of all, because the producers are not only working to rebottle the original non-magic, they're inevitably doomed to come up short. Even by those standards, Son Of The Mask is more handicapped than most, since 1994's The Mask was a vehicle tailored to the specific talents of rubber-faced fartsmith Jim Carrey, who's wisely keeping his distance. But as with Dumb And Dumberer, another sequel to a Carrey hit minus its principal cast, New Line owns the property and has retooled it for the thumb-sucking set, so parents are advised to bust out the emergency Ritalin. It's hard to believe that beings as young and delicate as children are the target audience for such a frantic, retina-searing assault on the senses, but as pure visceral experience, Son Of The Mask borders on the experimental.

Ally McBeal fans may want to stick around, though, because their beloved creepy computer-animated dancing baby is back, even in the ultrasound. The spawn of the title comes about when lowly cartoonist Jamie Kennedy discovers the fabled mask in his back yard and wears it to an office Hollywood party, where he turns into a whirling mass of runaway egotism and lame improvisation. The wild night ends with him impregnating his baby-crazed wife Traylor Howard, but the child really belongs to Loki, the Norse god of mischief, who wants his mask back and will stop at nothing to get it. Played by Alan Cumming, who could stand to cool off on the wacky shtick, Loki dons various unfunny disguises in pursuit of the baby while Kennedy tries to play father to an infant whose special qualities include speaking in a lucid adult voice, bouncing off the ceiling, and spraying a geyser of urine into Dad's face.

Though his roots in sketch comedy (TV's The Jamie Kennedy Experiment) make him a natural C-list successor to Carrey, Kennedy mostly occupies the sidelines while his scrappy mutt Otis and the Elasti-baby chase each other around the house. The Scooby-Doo movies are a lesson on the perils of CGI pooches, but nothing is more chilling than a computer-enhanced infant enunciating, sprinting, or doing the Electric Slide. (The worst moment is when the baby first converts from a flesh-and-blood child to a CGI puppet—it's as if his humanity has been cruelly stolen.) No doubt extensive market research shows that there's an audience out there for movies like Son Of The Mask, but it's too depressing to speculate who that might be.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews