The year was 1996. It was the summer and everyone was participating in the American tradition of flocking to the cinemas for some fun times on the big screen. It had been a big year, not just for movies, but for the sports world, as well. I, as a 13-year old boy, had enjoyed it all, front and center… Sometimes quite literally! It all seemed to revolve around one man: Michael Jordan. In just over a year’s worth of time, he had brought joy back into the hearts and minds of millions upon millions of spectators, not just nationally, but worldwide.

There was no way I could not make reference to the Chicago Bulls and professional basketball, but there is even more to it than that. Jordan was entering theaters all around so that we could watch him interact with Looney Tunes, in “Space Jam.” I watched as MJ was shown in various, real-life moments, all leading up to his surprising retirement from the NBA and into his quick entry into minor league baseball. From there, it was a semi-autobiographical journey to the present time. Instead of his real reasons for why he came back to basketball, it was all due to his time spent in an animated universe, away from the real world. At the time, I liked it. Children and adults of all ages could not resist his charm and charisma on (and off) the court. However, in hindsight, I think it is really just a marginally-good film. Considering how much time has past, I think that is pretty impressive. Age does not always treat movies with great care, does it?

25 years have past and the follow-up to “Space Jam,” which was announced some two or three years ago has graced our presence. Much like its predecessor, it stars the sport of basketball’s current, most well-known figure, this time being LeBron James. Though he has not had the same, overall positive impact that Michael Jordan had, he has, no doubt, left his mark and will be remembered for years to come, in a very similar fashion.

The movie starts out very similarly to the original, but once you get into the real story, the changes are pretty apparent. It seems to be less about the NBA star, himself, and more about his relationship to his family, which is barely present in the original film. Furthermore, it is about LeBron and one of his sons; a son who shares his athletic abilities, but does not share his same level of interest in participating in the sport, itself. Of course, one can see the eventual plot and how it is bound to unfold, but that does not necessarily mean (in my view) that the movie cannot be enjoyable. So…

I have to say that the level of charm and charisma that we once saw in Jordan does not exist at the same level with James. I think that one, fundamental reason for this is that the makers of this sequel of sorts chose to animate LBJ, which never happened when it was Michael. After awhile, you do not even know you are looking at LeBron, until he goes back to his physical form. I have seen James be effective as an actor before, but why not now? Could it be that he was thinking too much about trying to “one up” his predecessor, as he has been compelled to do so often over the past 10 years or so? I cannot say for certain. Maybe he cannot, either. However, it is not just due to LeBron’s performance that this movie did not “measure up.”

In the original film, there was a run of well-known names and faces from both the sports world and the movie industry. This one tried to do the same thing, but gave an actor a much larger role and it was a weird one: Don Cheadle as the man inside the “matrix,” if you will. Yes, it is an obvious reference to another Warner Brothers movie, but I will get into that a little bit later. The point is that Cheadle could not save the film, as great of an actor as he is. His energy and direction seemed off. It was like he was trying too hard to be Andy Kaufman and Morpheus all at once… Although “Man on the Moon” was not a WB title. Think of it as my own, unique reference.

It has become something of a trend for movies to pay homage to previous titles in hopes of engaging the audience with swaths of nostalgia. As “Space Jam 2” continued, I felt that this was happening too much for real enjoyment and started to become overplayed. Was there just not enough material for LBJ and the Tunes to work with on their own? How impactful were the Looney Tunes, anyway? I can barely remember anything that they contributed while in the presence of LeBron. Does that sound familiar? If you get the reference, do not feel too hurt. Just chalk it up to me being an “old head” when it comes to basketball. That is what most would do, is it not?

All the way down to the story arcs, everything feels reminiscent of something else that I have already seen, not just in a Warner Brothers movie, but just general. Again, that is not the end all, be all, but when a film fails to stand on its own merits, it is glaringly evident. I do not expect any originality at this point, but I wish to be entertained and I was not, for the most part.

Midway through the movie, I was bored and mostly uninterested, even though I already knew what was going to happen. Even the actual game, itself, was silly and boring, aside from playing “Where’s Waldo?” with all off the random WB characters located in the audience.

Look, I do not want to ruin anyone’s potential enjoyment if they have yet to see it or rain on anyone’s parade who actually liked this movie, but I am aiming to remain as objective as possible. Most would not call the first film a good movie and I pretty much agree, considering it “pretty good.” Almost everyone seems to think that this follow-up is inferior, but by how much? Well, for those of us who think of MJ as being greater than LBJ, the similarities are fascinating!…

Jordan did not live in anyone’s shadow once he reached the top. Can you honestly say the same thing about James? When “Space Jam” was released, it did nothing to hurt MJ’s legacy. Can you honestly say the same thing about LBJ and “Space Jam 2?” I sympathize with the position that LeBron is in, but not too much. After all, he still has much more going for him than 99.9% of the population around him.

The bottom line is that this movie lies in the shadows of its predecessor. That one was “pretty good” and this one is “below average.” I think those involved should take some solace in the fact that this is fairly common for a sequel in the film business. As for LeBron James, he has not really lost anything. He is simply right where he was before. There is nothing wrong with where he is. Try telling him that, though…