Product Details

• Actors: Michael Ironside, Julie Strain, Billy Idol, Pier Paquette, Sonja Ball
• Directors: Michel Lemire, Michael Coldewey
• Format: Animated, Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, NTSC
• Language: English
• Rating: R (Restricted)
• Number of tapes: 1
• Studio: Sony Pictures
• VHS Release Date: May 1, 2001
• Run Time: 88 minutes
• Average Customer Review: 2.9 out of 5 stars See all reviews (63 customer reviews)
• ASIN: B00004WG2B
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #28,906 in Video (See Bestsellers in Video)

  Popular in this category: (What's this?)

  #27 in

  Video > Animation > Science Fiction

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com
Instead of cartoon vignettes that chronicle adolescent fantasies of sex and drugs in the near future, this sequel to 1981's Heavy Metal follows but one story. On a distant planet, a fountain of eternal life has been locked away by a race of supposedly wise people, who have buried the only key deep in space. If found, the key will give directions to the planet, but will also drive the finder crazy--which is exactly what happens. On his way to the planet of youth, Tyler (voice of venerable character actor Michael Ironside) wipes out most of a space colony and kidnaps a sexy woman. His big mistake is that he doesn't kill the woman's sister, Julie (voice of B-movie actress Julie Strain), who then sets out on a mission of rescue and revenge. Created with an uneasy blend of computer and traditional cel animation, Heavy Metal 2000 is utterly predictable. Even the sex scenes are bland and politically correct, eschewing the joy of dirty sex in favor of glimpses of T&A and lots of violence and gore. Of course, one big reason for this movie is to supplement its heavy metal soundtrack, which includes Pantera, Monster Magnet, MDFMK, Insane Clown Posse, Billy Idol, and others. It's probably better to think of it more as a string of music videos than as a story. --Andy Spletzer

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

14 of 14 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars A sad attempt at a sequel, July 6, 2001

By	CeeTee (Flushing, NY USA) - See all my reviews

I have been a reader of HM magazine since I was a boy. I was and still am a great fan of the first film. HM2K is a big disappointment for me. Instead of offering some of today's best sci-fi writers an opportunity to contribute a compilation of short stories for the new film, the film makers went with a poorly developed feature length tale that is as predictable and boring as a merry-go-round at the county fare. Despite the aid of modern computers the animation lacks in style and detail as compared with the original film. Even the music is poor this time around! The first film was a successful attempt to translate the style of the magazine to the big screen. HM2K is clearly an attempt to provide the publishers wife (Julie Strain) with star billing in her own film. Trust me on this one......THIS MOVIE BITES!!

17 of 18 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars We've already seen this movie..., October 31, 2002

By	J. Ruth "jsruth" (Piscataway, NJ USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Watch the last segment of the original Heavy Metal called "Tarna" instead. The plot scheme of HM2K is lifted directly from that. They took a tight short story from one film and stretched it out needlessly here.

The details have changed, but it's still the same story.

The same major plot points exist: "Joe Nobody" encounters weird green object that turns him evil. Newly evil bad guy slaughters docile people without warning. Babe in high heel boots hunts him down for payback. Bouncy cleavage shots ensue.

Don't get me wrong, I dig the cleavage... but no one actually got down and dirty. Onscreen nudity without sex = BORING.

Several scenes were torn DIRECTLY from the original movie's "Tarna" segment. Why do angry babes bent on revenge always catch the bad guys drinking at some dive bar?

The one scene that brought home the lack of originality was when our heroine FAKK2 takes a dip in a pool and gets dressed in a leather bikini to do battle near the end. It was a shot-for-shot remake of Tarna taking a dip in a pool, then dressing in a leather bikini to do battle in the original movie. I do not exaggerate, they both put on their Victoria's Secret battle gear the SAME WAY. That would have been fine if this was a true sequel connected to the previous story.

But this is not the case.

HM2K is boring. The attempts at jokes all fall flat. You can get more bawdy humor from an episode of South Park on TV. The action scenes are clunky. The ... shots do nothing to stir the libido. There are many other faults, but the main problem is that someone thought this was a great idea and decided to waste their money to make it.

19 of 21 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Good job of craftsmanship- and totally forgettable, February 25, 2004

By	OAKSHAMAN "oakshaman" (Algoma, WI United States) - See all my reviews (TOP 100 REVIEWER)

I'll give you a measure of how forgettable this film was- I bought the new release of the original Heavy Metal and Heavy Metal 2000 at the same time. I found myself remembering almost every scene in the original movie, even though I hadn't seen it in over 20 years. Then I watched HM2000. About halfway through I vaguely recalled that I had seen it before, but there wasn't one single scene that I clearly remembered- and I probably only saw it about three years ago. It was that forgettable, that ordinary.

Don't get me wrong; this isn't necessarily a bad film. The animation is very well done, very slick and seamless. The writing and voice acting is competent and professional. The sound track is certainly better incorporated into the animation and story than it was in the original. Everything was competently done, it was just.... ordinary. Nothing jumped out at you. It was like a Saturday morning cartoon episode- just with a little more violence, and a lot more animated nudity (animated nudity- I mean what's the point?)

Personally, I'd save my money and buy the new release of the original Heavy Metal. Sure, the animation looks crude by today's standards- but it was done the old, time-consuming, expensive way of drawing one cell at a time. The original was also crammed full of a variety of different animation styles and story lines. Perhaps that was because it was the first big budget science fiction animated feature and the people involved had so much enthusiasm that they tried to do too much. In contrast, I don't think anyone got too enthusiastic about this film. Sure, they did a solid job of craftsmanship, but where is the originality, the fire, the spirit? Kind of reminds me of the original heavy Metal magazine, it started out fresh and new and just slowly petered out to nothing....