It's worth noting straight away that 'Highlander II: The Quickening' is widely regarded as one of the worst sequels ever made. I can see where that line of thinking comes from. The original 'Highlander' film was a science fiction tale about an immortal warrior from Scotland (played by non-Scottish actor, Christopher Lambert, but never mind) who had to fight other immortals with a sword until there was only one left - the prize being mortality.
Now, baring in mind that 'The Quickening' is a continuation of that story, I can totally understand why people hated it so much - and why it completely bombed at the Box Office, almost tanking a potentially profitable franchise from the start. So, if you're looking for a 'part 2' which takes the original's concept further and runs with it then don't watch 'The Quickening.' Just stick with the original. You'll be glad you did.
I could leave the review there, or I could mention that - if you took 'The Quickening' as a 'stand-alone' story - it could actually be quite good fun. No, it's still not a great movie. But if you're definition of 'good' is anywhere near mine - which is effectively: if it entertains me for an hour and a half then I don't regret watching it, then you might actually get something out of this.
The plot may totally contradict the original, but the special effects are good, the sets are really good (for the time and minimal budget) and it has Sean Connery in it. C'mon, if you're looking for pure unfiltered 'entertainment' then what more can you want? Okay, if you're still not convinced you also get Michael Ironside as the generic villain who chews up the scenery at every given opportunity. He's clearly going for it, no matter how bad the script is.
Yes, however much you want to like 'The Quickening' it's still a B-movie and - as a result - will never be more than a 'cult classic' at best (and it's probably not a 'classic' by most people's standards!). I'm not saying it's amazing and I'm sure as hell not saying that it's anywhere near as good as the original, but all I say is that - if you can put any biases aside that you might have at the direction the film goes after the first outing - there is some small enjoyment to be had at seeing Lambert and Connery on screen for a second time. They clearly have chemistry and genuine friendship and it's a shame that it was wasted on a movie that's now only known for infamy.
Now, baring in mind that 'The Quickening' is a continuation of that story, I can totally understand why people hated it so much - and why it completely bombed at the Box Office, almost tanking a potentially profitable franchise from the start. So, if you're looking for a 'part 2' which takes the original's concept further and runs with it then don't watch 'The Quickening.' Just stick with the original. You'll be glad you did.
I could leave the review there, or I could mention that - if you took 'The Quickening' as a 'stand-alone' story - it could actually be quite good fun. No, it's still not a great movie. But if you're definition of 'good' is anywhere near mine - which is effectively: if it entertains me for an hour and a half then I don't regret watching it, then you might actually get something out of this.
The plot may totally contradict the original, but the special effects are good, the sets are really good (for the time and minimal budget) and it has Sean Connery in it. C'mon, if you're looking for pure unfiltered 'entertainment' then what more can you want? Okay, if you're still not convinced you also get Michael Ironside as the generic villain who chews up the scenery at every given opportunity. He's clearly going for it, no matter how bad the script is.
Yes, however much you want to like 'The Quickening' it's still a B-movie and - as a result - will never be more than a 'cult classic' at best (and it's probably not a 'classic' by most people's standards!). I'm not saying it's amazing and I'm sure as hell not saying that it's anywhere near as good as the original, but all I say is that - if you can put any biases aside that you might have at the direction the film goes after the first outing - there is some small enjoyment to be had at seeing Lambert and Connery on screen for a second time. They clearly have chemistry and genuine friendship and it's a shame that it was wasted on a movie that's now only known for infamy.