Il ritorno dell'alieno

A watchable yet highly derivative work with a good-bad ratio that about balances the scales.

There's absolutely no point in bellyaching about its sequel-ship as proceeding Xtro from ten years prior because it is public record that a sequel couldn't be made unless it was in name only due to legal issues. I for one had enough of Xtro the first time around so it's no tragedy to me that this film had nothing to do with it.

Unlike its predecessor this film can't be mined for archetypal meaning. It is devoid of any depth, if I do say so myself.

Forget about Alien; Xtro 2 is a poor man's remake of "Metamorphosis: The Alien Factor" from 1990; another sequel that had nothing to do with its weird and disgusting older sibling.

But of course we can't forget about the impact of Alien on this film. The shots of the parallel dimension are almost identical (at a glance) to what we see on the monitors in front of an electrified Ash as Dallas, Lambert and Kane explore LV24. Then we have the entrance of the monster (I like the unzipping effect in Xtro 2, though).

Aesthetically this film is like a graphic novel set in the dark. It's quite impressive how they managed to get so much black in the background that all we see for the most part are the cast, creature, and the artefact of interest (a ripped grate, for example). I also appreciated that Jedburg was there at the bottom of the elevator shaft, as he should have been.

As I said: watchable, highly derivative, decent monster, aesthetically minimalist. A cultural summation rather than contribution. You know what you're getting.

I recently watched Xtro 2 (1991) on YouTube. The story follows a group of scientists working in an underground bunker who build a teleportation device to access another dimension. But once they open the portal, they have no idea what's waiting on the other side-or what might come through into our world... and they're about to find out.

Directed by Harry Bromley Davenport (Xtro), the film stars Jan-Michael Vincent (The Mechanic), Rachel Hayward (Cruel and Unusual), Paul Koslo (The Omega Man), and Tara Buckman (Silent Night, Deadly Night).

This sequel is a letdown. It feels like a made-for-TV movie and plays like a low-budget Aliens knockoff. The dialogue is stiff, the acting unconvincing, and the horror elements are weak-aside from a few decent corpse effects. The setting is passable for the story, but overall, there's nothing particularly memorable or original here.

I'd give this a 3/10 and recommend skipping it.

Scientists at a secret underground complex have found a way to travel to another dimension. Three dimension-travelers are the first to go through the gate - but are soon attacked by something that interrupts the communication with Earth. This horrible something uses the gate to travel back to the underground complex. Most of the staff are evacuated, except four heavily-armed militaries and Dr. Casserly and Dr. Summerfield who just can't stand each other. It turns out that the creature is a alien monster that craves human flesh. Not the best horror film I've seen. Some very nice creature effects and the filmmakers sling some pretty cool gore at us but There's virtually no tension, suspense or atmosphere. It was dull, too, why were all the sets so foggy? Couldn't they afford proper lighting? Or were the sets even complete? It's an OK time waster at best, at worst... 4/10.

I have seen all of the "Alien" films. I loved the "Alien" films. But the one I loved best was "Aliens", partly because of James Cameron's brilliant writing and directing, but mostly because I loved the guns. Oh, the guns! The M41-A Pulse Rifle rocked, but even better than that was the mighty Smartgun. I am a "connoisseur" of Alien ripoffs. So naturally, when I heard that this movie had a smartgun-like weapon in it, my response was, of course, "where can I find this movie?" After searching I finally came across it, and popped it in my DVD player.

Wow.

This movie absolutely blew me away with its unrelenting "Aliens"-style tense action, but mostly I was pleasantly surprised to find not only a smartgun-like weapon, but a near perfect smartgun replica! I was practically vibrating in my seat when I saw that thing fire.

But aside from the gun, I generally enjoyed the movie. It didn't have a "feel-good" happy- skippy ending, but it didn't have a "everyone dies" ending, which I appreciate (though the ending does confuse me a bit...) The creature design was brilliant. In all the "Alien" ripoffs I've seen, (besides the later "Alien Lockdown", which is more of a PredAlien anyways) this by far had the best creature. It even did the famous "headbite", but with its whole head! Altogether, I enjoyed this movie more than "Alien Resurrection" and "Alien 3 " combined.

Overall, I recommend this movie if you are a fan of "Alien" ripoffs, and have the patience for a bit of wooden acting.

I saw this movie for the first time when I was a young teenager, and I actually liked it. I honestly couldn't tell that the acting was bad, the suspense was absent, the plot was non-existent. So, is it then safe to say that this movie probably was made by young teenagers, unaware of the different aspects that make a good sci-fi/horror movie work? I had the chance to re-watch it last night, so I did. Better had not done it, because it's another childhood memory shattered.

This movie indeed is a shameless ALIEN rip-off. There's a chest-burster-scene, there's a BIG gun attached to a soldier's body like in ALIENS, there are soldiers crawling through air-shafts with somebody looking at a monitor telling them the creature's closing in on them,...

It's a shame, really, because the 'other dimension'-concept had potential. The film-makers should have shown more of it. Like the soldiers scouting the landscape or them entering the dome you see in the distance. Actually, you don't see sh!t. Just some fuzzy transmitted images on a monitor. I guess they didn't have the budget to write all that in the screenplay, since they clearly used only three sets or so.

I'm still trying to figure out why I liked this movie back then. I think because there's some mild gore in it (chest- & face-bursting and an exploding dude at the end), but they cut away from it too quickly. So it must have been the creature, which looks reasonable (but still rubbery) and fairly dangerous when it shows its teeth, but it moves way too slow.

Anyway, I'm waisting too much words on this crappy movie. The important thing is: XTRO II: The Second Encounter is actually no sequel to XTRO (1983). The two movies have absolutely NOTHING in common. I even think the first XTRO is worth tracking down and watching it, 'cause it's a peculiar and unique little sci-fi/horror-gem. XTRO II is not. But if you want to see every possible ALIEN rip-off: Be my guest.