Planète hurlante 2

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.

Don't waste your time. I just caught a viewing of this. Waste of my time.

I like sci-fi, I even like bad sci-fi movies. I will watch anything with Lance Henriksen in it. This movie had bad special effects, no plot. The movie plays out exactly as you might think it will. There are 0 surprises anywhere. Many parts make no sense.

The chicks are cute. Beyond that it is a waste of time. Someone posted in the forums a few weeks ago what they thought the entire plot of the movie would be. I really wish they would stop making such horrible direct to video sequels of movies I like. People would go to the theaters for a good screamers 2 movie.

There are quite a few reviews stating this is utter crap. I don't think it's quite that bad, for a straight to DVD sequel it's one of the better ones I've seen.

I liked the original Screamers, it's one of the best kept secrets of 90's sci-fi. Not a perfect movie by any means, but a good sleeper. In this movie you have a rescue team heading back to Sirius 6B.

The plot is actually quite similar to Cameron's Aliens, and does a pretty good job at it. Quite a few of straight to DVD movies don't have a plot even this strong, even if it's something you've seen many times before. It may also be the point that saves this movie, that it relies on a formula that's already proved good.

The sets and production values are surprisingly good. The space ship looks believable, the gore is surprisingly strong (even too strong for my liking) and some of the images are genuinely creepy.

What tunes the movie down a bit is the acting/casting. While there are a few passable performances, most of them are just not good. Most TV series have better casting. The acting is not as over the top as it could be, but there are some performances that just don't work. Lance Henriksen is a capable and charismatic actor and I'm really not sure why he's into these b- horror movies these days.

Still it's better than what people here are writing. It's not a masterpiece, but entertaining enough to keep you seated for it's duration.

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 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.