Screamers 2 - L'evoluzione

I thought the original sleeper 'Screamers (1995) (with Peter Weller) was an agreeable, if unspectacular sci-fi thriller, which at the base had an intriguing story but this cheaper and straight to DVD fare doesn't do anything out of the ordinary but to stew up the same get-up linked together by a bunch of uninspired ideas and devices. The background of these deadly creations doesn't pull you in anymore and the throwaway script could've done a lot more than the predictable situation we found the story opts for. The sub-standard special effects were reasonably catered for such a production, they weren't great nor were they terrible. Even with its crisp look, better than expected performances (led by a stern Gina Holden and a small part for Lance Henriksen) and some bloody pulp (with some very vicious attacks). However it did lack a relentless sense of paranoid intensity for any of the thrills to work and made the pace completely haggard. Every now and then I would check the timer on the DVD player and to my surprise it was going to be a drag… a real slow viewing. Tell me, you couldn't see that sudden revelation coming too? As it is, 'The Hunting' is a bland b-movie which makes you appreciate the original even more.

Greetings,

I will keep it short. This is a movie full of clichés and inconsistencies in relation to the original. Mediocre at best - it should not be considered "Canon" in my opinion as Screamers deserves a proper sequel.

The narrative is broken at best - remember the original? The screamers were made on Earth, there was no point in going back to planet 6B to "retrieve data". It was on Earth to begin with.

Sfx are terrible and could work only for short intros in a video game. The Screamer animations look very bad and they are repetitive. The combat scenes are also disappointing, and don't provide any thriller whatsoever. The best scenes of the movie are not the ones where Sfx is used.

The acting is not terrible but there is a lack of fluidity, as none of the protagonists are memorable the relationships between them are superficial. A black guy was a member of the team - but he dies quite early. Heroically. I suppose that's what it is called these days - a "racially inclusive" movie.

The original was a pure 90s classic, it had its own charm. There were some plot inconsistencies, but it tried to surprise viewers. Remember the child robot? It was creepy. Here on the other hand we don't have any of that.

I personally would like to ignore this as a sequel. Can somebody make a movie where the Earth civilization dies, and Sirius 4 inhabitants face the imminent threat? That would be a lot more plausible.

I would like to see a proper sequel, a reboot of sorts.

When I came across this direct-to-video sequel I was surprised to find that it was to the 1995 cult film, Screamers. After reading so many reviews on how bleak and dingy it looked and sounded, I wasn't expecting to come across any film related to it. I was a fan of the original however and I was really excited to see what the sequel had to offer. Sadly I was disappointed with the outcome of this film.

A group of soldiers come across a distress call sent out from the planet, Sirius 6B. Ahh yes, we know what that planet holds on it! Commanding this group is Lt. Victoria Bronte, the daughter of Col. Joseph A. Hendrickson from the first film portrayed brilliantly by Peter Weller. I do like how screenwriter Miguel Flores tries to tie in the story of the last film with this one. Some sequels abandon the original story line completely and that can be frustrating for fans. The screenplay even allows veteran actor Lance Henrikson's character, Orsow, to give Bronte some info on what her father (Joseph A.) was like. However, besides Henrikson, none of the other actors really make themselves any different from another.

The part that did make a difference in the movie were the special effects. Yes, Screamers (1995) was a knock-off of other popular films but it utilized its materials efficiently; even if the creature effects were super dated for its time. But in here, the bloodshed is cranked up, as are the creature effects. It looked so good that it almost seemed like putting it into the category of the cheap movies that the sci-fi channel airs is an insult. The fact that there was more blood on the screen made me happy alone. I mean, these are killer robots, so let's see some carnage!

Also the screamers in this film would've been cool to see in the original. The way their mechanical bodies sound is high-tech and state of the art. I also liked how the human screamers didn't look meager either. For those who hadn't seen the first, the human screamers had several sharp blades in its mouth and hands. The way the screamers reveal themselves here is much more interesting; their face actually splits open! Yikes.

All of this is great but what wrecks this movie altogether is the plot. To make a long story short, the story runs almost identical to that of the first film from 1995. In some ways, the so-called "sequel" could be considered a reboot as well because it doesn't do anything new with its characters or story. Once I realized where the story was going after the first couple acts, I became disgruntled at the fact that I would be watching the same movie but with different actors, more blood and a fresh coat of chrome put over the old screamers.

And the worst was the ending to film, which I obviously won't reveal but for any science-fiction/horror genre film, there will always be a twist ending. And for this one, I don't really know how this leaves anything open to make another sequel. They practically killed the franchise by giving such slap-in-the-face ending. That was not needed. I came to watch this movie so I could enjoy and I ended being frustrated and only slightly satisfied.

The only thing Screamers: The Hunting has are special effects. Everything else is practically the same. The story was barely given any changes at all.

I caught the first "Screamers" in the theater and enjoyed the heck out of it. Director Christian Duguay had the foresight to use some decent actors (Peter Weller chiefly among them), paid attention to fashioning a politically charged story and did his best to deliver a decent film. Hey, it wasn't perfect, but he succeeded more than not.

Now comes Sheldon Wilson who tries to make up for a ridiculous story with some interesting visuals. If you give bad actors some good dialogue or even good actors some bad dialogue, you sometimes get lucky. However, when you give bad actors some bad dialogue, riddle a plot with inconsistencies, gaping holes and a lack of any logic while making it all extremely easy to pick out every twist and turn to come, then you get "Screamers: The Hunting".

Things are still bad on Sirius 6B and when a distress signal is sent to Earth, the Alliance dispatches a few 20-somethings to seek out any survivors and bring them back home. Speeding their efforts is some sort of super storm that's going to wipe out all life on the planet, giving them a couple of days to complete their mission.

Along the way they'll meander around, discover some survivors, run, discover that Screamers have gotten aboard their ship (how, exactly, is never disclosed), run back to the survivors, get the majority of the survivors slaughtered, leave with someone meant to be a red herring (right), meander some more while looking for fuel cells and... Let's just leave it at lots of meandering, lots of banal dialogue, lots of bad acting and a thankless appearance by Lance Henrickson. Why didn't they put Henrickson in charge of the mission? The man has presence and the young crew members simply do not.

And the end? It's as predictable as the rest of the film. Oh, and don't forget to count how many times the characters mention the word "screamers". Screenwriter Miguel Tejada-Flores seems to think it's a really cool word and repeats it every opportunity he gets.

I was extremely excited to learn that somebody picked up the story again and moved forward with it. And after watching "Screamers: The Hunting", I think Sheldon Wilson owes fans of the original film an apology.

Observing the comments I've read that give this film a 1 star rating, it is really not that bad, there are some negative points to it but also a lot of positive points that make up for it, one of the negative points is that its predictable, you can tell who's going to survive and who's going to get turned into mince meat as soon as the main characters are introduced, the effects are to me the usual DTV standard, not overly impressive and to bad either.

The acting wasn't that bad either, some performances could've been better though, Lance Henriksen's performance in the film certainly stands out like always, even though he's only in it for more or less 20 minutes.

If you've read the negative comments before reading the positive, just bare in mind that this is a DTV film, and obviously had a low budget, so this is a good movie via DTV standards, and wasn't really better than the first one but it also wasn't worse.