Némesis 2

I have a certain affection for the first "Nemesis" film. I know that everyone considers it to be pretty bad, but at least it was fast-moving and enjoyable. This first sequel doesn't have the original's non-stop action and narrative force, and it's awfully reminiscent of both "The Terminator" (in its "messianic" myth) and "The Predator" (in the look of the monster that pursues the heroine). But as B-movies go it's still somewhat above average, and Sue Price, the starring female bodybuilder, is not only impressively built but very appealing, too. (**)

I remember enhoying the 1992 sci-fi action movie "Nemesis" quite a lot back in my teenage years. But having returned to it not too long ago, it was actually not all that great a movie. And I do also remember having seen the 1995 movie "Nemesis 2: Nebula" once or twice, back in the day. However, I have entirely forgotten about it, aside from the big, muscular woman that was starring in it. And I remember always being somewhat repulsed by her physique.

And as I had the opportunity to sit down and watch "Nemesis 2: Nebula" once again here in 2024, of course I did so. However, it wasn't with a whole lot of great expectations though.

The movie is set to take place in 2077 in what is known as Cyborg America, yet they are still using weapons we have in our times today and even 30 years ago, that made very little sense. Wouldn't such weapons be considered archaic by that time? The storyline in "Nemesis 2: Nebula" deviates so much from the 1992 movie "Nemesis" that it hardly feels like the same franchise. Just exactly what were writers Rebecca Charles and Albert Pyun thinking when they concocted the script and storyline for this movie?

Needless to say that there wasn't a single famous or familiar actor or actress on the cast list. But then again, a movie such as "Nemesis 2: Nebula" would hardly draw in great talents, now would it? I have to say that I am still put off by the physique of Sue Price (playing Alex).

The character gallery in the movie is flaccid and superficial. You don't really get to know any of the characters, as they are either just extras or briefly passing by without much of any influence on the narrative (not that there was much of that either).

The special effects in the movie are exactly that; special. For a movie made in 1995, the special effects were quite dubious and laughable. A sci-fi movie such as this needs proper special effects to fully come off as being believable and creditable. And the props and wardrobe department didn't really manage to make the movie have a believable futuristic feel to it, which spoke well against the overall impression of "Nemesis 2: Nebula".

This is essentially a movie where you just disable your brain cells, lean back and enjoy the dubious sci-fi action, whilst munching on whatever snacks you have readily available. The movie requires absolutely no particular focus or concentration on the storyline.

"Nemesis 2: Nebula" is a futuristic sci-fi action movie without much of any actual sci-fi feel to it. It was, at best, a cheap knock off based on the "Predator" movie.

My rating of director Albert Pyun's 1995 "Nemesis 2: Nebula" lands on a very generous three out of ten stars.

Ok the first one of these movies was bad but making a sequal is going to far. One the other hand it had nothing to do with it's predecessor. The first 1/2 an hour is all spoken in an African language and isn't subtitled. It is impossible to tell what anyone is saying and after about 30 seconds you stop caring. The "alien effects" were done by smearing vasaline on the camera when ever they filmed Nebula (the bad guy). The only thing worse than this movie was Nemesis 3 which was pretty much just footage from the second one scrambled out of order. I think they were supposed to be flash backs. The only notable thing about this movie is it had a member of the production crew with the unfortunate name Yolanda Squatpump.

The first one, while not great, was decent and this is a massive let down. A new actor who's even worse than the previous one and a meandering plot that's just a Predator rip off crossed with a bit of Terminator.

Albert Pyun is the writer and director of many a straight-to-video action movie (just look on the bottom shelf of your local video store). Generally dreadful, his films are cocktails of bigger, better ones, but this one does stand out from the crowd. I first rented this a couple of years ago, and I actually quite enjoyed it. It's about Alex (body-builder Sue Price) who was adopted by a tribe in Northern Africa, after her mother was killed by theives. Raised by the way of the warrior, she's a tough kind of cross between 'Alien slayer' Ripley and 'cyborg dodger' Sarah Connor. However, she's completely human either. She is in fact genetically modified (as explained in an introductory voice-over) and can jump and run and fight much better than anybody else. So, when a cyborg (the Nebula of the title) is sent back from the future to kill, she has her work cut out. Yes, it is like T2; yes, the cybergenetic villain is basically the PREDATOR; and yes, the budget was about £2.50. But, it is very entertaining in a half-drunk, don't-quite-know-what's-going-on state of mind.

The action scenes are a tad flat, and of course there is a whole encyclopedia of cliches, but if you except if for a low-budget action movie, which it most definitely is, then you just sit back and enjoy it.

It's crap, but it's good crap, and at least it can admit it.