Terminator 2

This film has nothing to do with the 1991 sequel to the 1984 film "The Terminator." In fact, this is a low-budget film about a motely group of half-man, half-machine creatures stalking and battling each other in a post-apocalyptic future. It rips off (poorly) from just about every significant sci-fi film ever made (including BUT NOT LIMITED TO Star Trek, Aliens, Predator, Highlander, Mad Max, Terminator, etc). It was simply named "Terminator II" because of some similar plot ideas to the Schwartzenegger movie, and probably to cash in on the success of the original film.

As an unofficial sequel, it doesn't hold a candle to the official one made in 1991, a classic in it's own right. And as a film, it's even worse. Summing it up, it's simply not a good movie. Poor effects, poor acting, and lousy storyline. Skip it and go with the REAL, James Cameron sequel.

*1/2 out of ****

Shlock ripoff of Aliens and The Terminator. Must be seen to be believed. I laughed, I cried laughing and it is glorious. Watch with friends and cocktails.

This movie is not actually a sequel to the 1984 James Cameron movie, but more or less a remake of Cameron's 1986 movie ALIENS. The major difference between this movie and Aliens is... well, almost nothing actually.

The plot, lines of dialog, situations, etc. are all completely identical to those seen in ALIENS, such as the mischievous android who more or less plays the "Burke" role up until he gets damaged a bit, then he goes on a TERMINATOR-style rampage chasing after the woman and the young girl.

The actual Aliens here are more like genetic mutations, and they don't really look that bad considering they're just guys in monster suits. Whatever they have to do with the plot is negligible since the movie seems to be more of a post-nuke film having to do with soldiers unlocking some government conspiracy deep in the bowels of a futuristic ruined Venice.

The cast is uniformly awful, with several Americans (some with South African accents) in the cast who appear to have little or no prior acting experience, sort of the same situation with TROLL 2 or CRUEL JAWS where I think the production company just wheeled through K-mart asking people if they wanted to act in a film. Only Fausto Lombardi comes across as anything resembling good, though Chris Ahrens and Janna Ryan are pretty amusing bad movie veterans.

The musical score for this picture I believe was liberated from a number of other 80's films, including Blade Runner and Miami Cops. Much of the footage (with the explosions, etc.) is taken from Mattei's earlier DOUBLE TARGET too.

So bad is this film, in fact, that writer/co-director Claudio Fragasso refused to make any more movies with Mattei afterward - and that's saying a lot. I have to say that I enjoyed it to a certain extent, though it's more fun to wonder how they managed to avoid a lawsuit than it is to actually sit down and watch the movie in one sitting. A little too depressing and dull to be unintentionally funny - though it does certainly have its moments.

Wow. I'm kind of surprised by its decent rating on this site. But, talk about plagiarism. "Aliens" is what it wants to be. And "Aliens" it is not. It blatantly lifts scenes, dialogues ("Please, kill me"), characters, story arches and ideas. It's that obvious… you'd be in amazement. Yeah, you could probably play a drinking game with what it tries to squeeze in. It simply becomes a waiting to see what they rip- off next. And throw in a touch of "Terminator". Especially within the film's dying stages and misplaced climax. Well in some countries it does have the title "Terminator II". Wonder what James Cameron would have made of it? Director Bruno Mattei and writer Claudio Fragasso are no strangers to trash, and the grungy "Shocking Dark" is no exception to the trend. Too bad it's not as exploitative in its visuals. Even though it's on the cheap, daft in every sense, the plot doesn't make a lick of sense and junky as it can be… what killed it for me was how flat, sluggish and meandering the action and story came out to be. No great shakes that the acting is wooden (and that constant screaming from the Newt character gets truly unbearable), the genetic monsters look completely goofy and the thrills are more silly than rousing, but it's not as fun as it could have been. Good idea of the setting; a polluted Venice, despite most of the time is spent in dark, dingy and long underground corridors, which is caught by murky photography. Lame-brain, but it gets bogged down too often and doesn't let its outlandish nature implode.

"SHOCKING DARK" (1989, Mattei) needs to be held accountable for a few things before it is applauded for anything.

1. It is a shameless rip-off of "ALIENS" (1986, Cameron), having look-alike actors, copied characters, and stolen scenarios, scenes, dialogue and themes. 2. Music is a blatant copy of John Williams' "JAWS" (1974, Spielberg), Jerry Goldsmith's and James Horner's scores for "ALIEN" (1979, Scott) and "ALIENS" respectively; other music is okay but not great. 3. The acting is really very bad and made worse when you realise the cast are often impersonating the cast of "ALIENS" but really badly. The little girl, our new Newt, is really irritating. 4. It was released as "TERMINATOR 2" and just when you settle into the "ALIENS" plot an element of "TERMINATOR" (1984, Cameron) is introduced. This Terminator is the most annoying Terminator imaginable. 5. The costumes worn by the protagonists are pathetic and the "mega force" is a childish sounding name. 6. There's virtually no gore whatsoever. 7. Awful final 20 minutes.

The good points: 1. It opens intriguingly. 2. The monsters are really very good. Not "ALIENS" good but good.