Hellboy II: The Golden Army

[LootSubu42]

Didn't Part 1 develop the characters ?

It's a sequel, right ?

Sequels shouldn't further develop characters? Your comment is a bit strange to me, but seeing as it is only 10 words, maybe it's just lacking the necessary elaboration to clarify your point
I come from the line of thinking that all events have impacts on characters, small or big though they may be - characters inherently have to develop because they are reacting to all that is happening around them (even the choice not to react is a choice, and develops the character). So development must happen, but does it make sense in the context of the film? Or is there something lacking/missing/confusing?
Perhaps our definitions of "developing" are different - in which case...blame semantics.
I think I know where you're coming from J.R., but I just see it a little differently

 

[Batutta]

Finally saw this on Blu-Ray. Some great action setpieces, amazing character designs, fantastic fight choreography, and the always reliable Ron Perlman being his surly best. Unfortunately, the story did absolutely nothing for me. It passed through my brain without touching a single neuron. Great eye candy and nothing else.

 

[Capt Quirk]

While I liked a lot of points in the movie, I enjoyed the overall tone of the first one better. The whole WWII tie in was great. And yes, there is a resemblance to Pan's Labyrinth, just like you could see a similarity between any two Jim Hensen films. And speaking of Pan's Labyrinth, it was ok, a little creepy, but just ok. And since we are talking creepy and Hellboy 2, did anybody else think young Hellboy was creepy? There was just something really odd about him.