6/10
For a straight to video sequel, this isn't bad at all
30 July 2016
Warning: Spoilers
THE HITCHER was a good thriller of the 1980s that's been well remembered by a lot of fans, not least thanks to Rutger Hauer giving one of his best performances as the ice-cold, stop-at-nothing serial killer. In more recent years, Hollywood has tried, unsuccessfully, to have another slice of the cake, first by releasing this straight-to-video sequel and then by releasing a bigger budgeted remake with Sean Bean in the Hauer role. I've seen the latter, and it's nothing special, so this undistinguished sequel was the last of the 'hitcher' films (not counting the countless rip-offs) that I had to see. I wasn't missing much.

The most interesting thing about the film is that C. Thomas Howell reprises his role from the first film. I didn't like him much in THE HITCHER, but he's grown up a lot since then and I actually found that he gave a pretty good performance. For me, he was the most interesting person on screen. He provides a nice, fitting link between the first and the second films, and as the sole returning actor, a lot rests on his shoulders, but he doesn't let that stop him.

The worst thing about this sequel, though, is the story, which is just a blatant copy of the first film's plot. A hitcher is picked up and then dropped off after being revealed to be a psychopath. There's shtick with severed fingers, roadside cafes, and somebody who gets tied up between a truck cab and its stationary load. Once again, the intrepid sheriff department don't believe a word of what's going on, so it's up to our youthful hero to stop the hitcher in his tracks. Yep, we've seen it all before and done better, so aside from the plane vs. truck climax (which I liked, and which is something new), don't go expecting originality here.

This time around the hitcher himself is played by regular bad guy for hire Jake Busey, son of Gary. Jake's been burning up the screen in the likes of ROAD HOUSE 2 and IDENTITY, so he seems an obvious choice for the part. He doesn't come close to Hauer's performance, though, or even Bean's for that matter. Busey's encouraged to go way over the top at all times, with plenty of wisecracks and humour along the way. I appreciate the vitality he brings to the film, and I do like him as an actor, but he just doesn't sit right here. Better is Kari Wuhrer, as the attractive heroine forced to go up against the maniac. Many women in modern horror films are pretty, young and poor actresses to boot, but not so Wuhrer. She really delivers her part and it was a delight to have her on screen.

Anyway, things play out as you'd imagine, and there's nothing in the way of shocks or indeed surprises (although the film does open with a most effective twist). Saying that, the desert locations are well used and the action has a certain slickness about it that makes it appealing, so I can't say I didn't enjoy this one; for a straight-to-video sequel made almost twenty years after the original, I think it does okay.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed