1987.5.20 芝加哥太阳报
这部完全翻车了，他们不该拍续集。《比弗利山超级警探》原始剧本是为史泰龙而写的，结果成了艾迪·墨菲主演。等它成了爆款，思路就变成了：《警探2》应该是部真正的艾迪·墨菲电影，加多笑点，缩减枪战追逐戏。
唉，没想到第二部比第一部更“史泰龙”，我都不确定他们到底打不打算把它拍成喜剧片了，里面充斥着好莱坞层出不穷的俗套情节和流水线生产的暴力。但这部续集似乎不打算拍得搞笑，反而试图把离谱犯罪剧情严肃化，搞得我们真的想看一样。
还有一个大问题，艾迪·墨菲在这部片真的不讨喜，莽汉一般招摇过市，半途而废。总之他们忘记了这部戏的初心：一个风趣的底特律街头警察歪打正着到了比弗利山，并且缩减昂贵场景。在这部片统统不见。
墨菲对片中漫画版场景的处理是：用刺耳愤怒的语调朝所有人吼。有一场戏他来到花花公子大厦，开始朝收据员大叫，而你只想尴尬离场。与其说解决问题，墨菲更像是来闯祸的。
何为喜剧片？我知道这是蛮基本的问题，但《警探2》从未思考过。喜剧不该是出自某种基于人性洞察的一连串惊叹中吗？假设在比弗利山，人人贪财恋权；再假设一个来自底特律的黑人警察降临此地，对这些声色犬马和酒池肉林嗤之以鼻，刀切黄油般直击腐败——这才好笑。但《警探》系列尝试两部之后仍未能充分挖掘。相反，墨菲和他的同僚有着致命伤——“以贱制贱”。
制片人Don Simpson和Jerrry Bruckheimer应该为剧本买单，他们本该能买部更好的。《警探2》的情节重复了所有无脑/套路/现代高科技的犯罪片。这根本称不上是情节，只是一连串标准事件，包括：追逐/邪恶大亨/性感美人/打手和枪战（追逐戏要有一辆水泥卡车，并且在追逐的时候总要出故障）。
我是艾迪·墨菲的粉丝，我认为只要时机合适，他现在完全可以胜任比大家都幽默的电影角色。我蛮喜欢他去年圣诞节上映的喜剧片《金童子》，他进入荒诞而快活的情节里，也是个可爱角色。他在一系列异国险境中顽强抵抗。我还喜欢他在《48小时》（1982年）里那种从容的街头智慧。
我不喜欢的是未说明的假设，墨菲在《警探2》中的确好笑，前提是所有挡他路的人都是傻瓜。可能墨菲需要学学老套的“我爱露西”系列：露西面临她难以解决的问题，她要在一个臭屁餐厅应付一个傲慢服务员。她该怎么做，朝他吼吗？不，她总能找到方法杀杀对方气焰，比如明确自我，坚持要求自己被作为人对待。
这是《警探2》所缺少的。我们并不反对比弗利山那些混蛋们对待墨菲的方式，因为坦白讲，他简直要更混。当然，因为他是明星，情节中没人敢对他动手动脚。让我们设想这种可能：他演的角色不变，调转情节，让他当那个笑柄，这部片估计更搞笑。
Something has gone terribly wrong here. They've made the wrong sequel. The original "Beverly Hills Cop" was the screenplay written for Sylvester Stallone, but filmed with Eddie Murphy as the star. After it was such a big hit, the theory was that "Beverly Bills Cop II" would be a real Eddie Murphy movie, with more comedy and fewer guns and chases.
Alas, Part 2 seems even more like a Stallone vehicle than the first movie. I'm not even sure it's intended as a comedy. It's filled wall to wall with the kind of routine action and violence that Hollywood extrudes by the yard and shrink-wraps to order. But the sequel makes no particular effort to be funny, and actually seems to take its ridiculous crime plot seriously - as if we cared.
There's another problem, too. A big one. Eddie Murphy is not likable in this movie. He comes across as a loud, arrogant boor; a little of him goes a long way. Somehow they've lost track of their original appealing idea, which was that a smart, funny street cop from Detroit would waltz into Beverly Hills and deflate the Porsche-and-sunglasses set. Doesn't work that way this time.
Murphy's idea of a comic scene in this movie is to shout endlessly at people in a shrill, angry voice. There's a scene where he visits the Playboy Mansion and shouts at the receptionist, and you want to crawl under your seat in embarrassment. Murphy comes across as the problem rather than the solution.
What is comedy? That's a pretty basic question, I know, but "Cop II" never thought to ask it. Doesn't comedy usually center around a series of surprises based on insights into human nature? Let's assume that everyone in Beverly Hills is obsessed with money, power, possessions and social status. Let's further assume that a black cop from Detroit rides into town and doesn't give a damn for their effete values and conspicuous consumption, and cuts through the crap like a knife through butter. That would be funny. It is, however, an idea the "Beverly Hills Cop" movies have been unable to fully exploit after two tries. Instead, Murphy and his associates make the fatal error of assuming that the way you deal with jerks is to be a bigger jerk.
For what producers Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer probably paid for the screenplay for this movie, they should have been able to buy a new one. The plot of "Cop II" is recycled right out of every other brainless, routine, modern, high-tech crime picture. It's really not even a plot; it's a series of standard sequences, involving The Chase, The Powerful Men of Evil, The Sexy Bitch-Goddess, The Hit Men and The Shootout. (The Chase involves a cement truck, and it proves definitively that cement trucks do not work very well in chases.)
I'm an Eddie Murphy fan. I think that on a good day, he is capable of being funnier than anybody else in the movies right now. I was one of the admirers of "The Golden Child," his comedy from last Christmas, which plugged him into a cheerfully ridiculous plot, and made him a lovable character who was doggedly trying to endure a series of exotic dangers. I also like Murphy when he's street-smart and capable, as in "48 Hrs.," (1982).
What I don't like is the unstated assumption, in "Cop II," that Murphy is funny by definition, and that anybody who gets in his way is a fool. Maybe Murphy should study some of those old "I Love Lucy" episodes where Lucy gets into situations she can't handle: She's up against a snooty headwaiter in a stuck-up restaurant, let's say. What does she do? Scream at the guy? No, she always finds a way to deflate the guy simply by remaining true to her own character and insisting on being treated as a human being
That's what's missing in "Cop II." We don't object to the way the jerks in Beverly Hills want to treat Murphy, because, frankly, he's a bigger jerk. Because he's the star, of course, no one else in the plot is allowed to lay a glove on him. But here's an interesting possibility. Given the character he plays in "Cop II," the movie might have been funnier if they had reversed every situation and made him the butt of the jokes.
