Screamers: The Hunting (2009 Video) User Reviews

Entertaining B-Movie Made for TV with Unfair Reviews

[claudio_carvalho · 6/10 · 17 October 2011]

After two months in cryogenic sleep, a rescue mission composed of seven crew members arrive in Sirius 6B to investigate an SOS distress signal sent from the planet. Sirius 6B was assumed uninhabited after the annihilation of humans by the weapons screamers created by the scientist Orsow (Lance Henriksen).

On the arrival, the team led by Captain Andy Sexton (Greg Bryk) is informed that in seven days, the planet will be blown by a severe storm that will destroy any survivor and they need to leave the planet before the event. Sooner they meet humans in a military outpost that battle against them and the team spends the night in a facility. They find hundreds of deactivated screamers and during the night, Sexton sneaks out and charges one screamer to download its hard disk with all the information about the lethal weapon. On the next morning, they return to their spaceship Medusa and learn that s screamer has killed the watcher Soderquist (Jody Richardson) and stolen the battery cells. Now they must contact the hostile survivors the get any battery cell that might be available in the planet. When they succeed in contacting the survivors, they learn that the screamers have evolved to a state-of-art generation with human form.

"Screamers: The Hunting" is an entertaining B-movie made for television with the king of the genre Lance Henriksen. I had glanced at the unfair reviews in IMDb and only yesterday I decided to see this film with the lowest expectation.

However, the story is very reasonable, with action, good special effects considering that it is a TV movie and a predictable rip-off "Alien" in the end. The rescue team is probably the clumsiest ever, since the team members commit only mistakes and misjudgment of the situation and leads themselves and the survivors that have been living in the planet for many years to death. How the screamer has entered in Medusa is a good question. Why one member of the squad walks without his tab is another good question.

Anyway, if the viewer likes B-Sci-Fi films with action, he or she will probably enjoy "Screamers: The Hunting" despite the flaws in the plot. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Screamers, A Caçada" ("Screamers, The Hunting")

Sequel - a nail in the cofin for the franchise

[a-kastenas · 5/10 · 12 April 2021]

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.

I give it an undeserved 7 outta 10 for being Hilarious!

[pranakhan · 5/10 · 4 December 2009]

OK, normally I seriously complain about people who leave cynical reviews and can always find something redeeming in many of the most awful films, but this movie almost made a cynic too! That was... until I realized how much fun it was to watch! This movie was extremely entertaining, but it most certainly wasn't due to the quality of film. Simply put: this film is so poorly thrown together and so monumentally cheesy it, by accident, becomes laugh-out-loud camp sci-fi comedy. Like those old 50's era cult camp sci-fi films! My teen son and I had a blast watching this thing. We didn't go more than 15 to 30 seconds between laughs at terribly obviously set pieces, corny Halloween-ish costuming, gawd awful dialog, moronically unrealistic character behaviors, and hilariously nonsensical plot development.

I highly recommend you watch this film with a group of friends for a great home-made MSTK 3000 style movie heckling night! When you do, be sure to look for these kinds of things: 1. An "elite military" squad lands on a remote planet for a rescue mission, but due to complete incompetence they do things that would make a naive Army Private cringe, like: the commander NEVER gives out orders, when shooting starts 3 people shout orders, in the most heated point of a firefight one of the "elites" stands up from cover for NO REASON and takes well deserved arrow to the shoulder, the commender carries his gun by the gun sight (maybe hes the squad sniper?), they use REALLY old-fashioned walkie-talkies with a very long telescoping metal antenna (I guess radio shack FRS 2.4Ghz family radios are obsolete in the future). I could keep going but time and space limits say I should move to the next item.

2. Terrible costumes. Lance Henrickson's character (the best damn actor in the whole movie) wears a mask with a camera lens over one eye and the costume designer failed to paint over the "SAE F 2.9 RAZOR" stuff on it. The crack military squad goes into a known hostile situation but only after getting attacked do they return wearing extra crappy body armor. The commander looks so queenly while wearing his special helmet, and is that a pregnancy test or an MP3 player stuck on the side of it? 3. If the planet's human survivors have all these firearms, then why the heck does that girl carry a knife with a bone handle and shoot wooden arrows with a bow?!?!?!? 4. One of the FUNNIEST scenes: When one of the squad members is killed by the screamers, the rest of his squad actually BURN his body openly in the desert and stand right next to it like they are cold and trying to warm their hands. I was so waiting for one of them to ask if anyone had some marshmallows for s'mores! They try to explain this saying that the guy wanted to be cremated by his elders, but wouldn't that be the duty of his family back on earth? I mean, do our marines over in Iraq or Afghanistan simply hold human-body bonfires out in the desert after a bad firefight? Jeeeeez! 5. Ludicrously funny sets. Within the first few minutes note the first shot of the interior of the ship looks like a dressed up beauty parlor! I'm positive those were dressed up barber shop chairs! Watch the first time the squad re-enters their ship. A ladder appears out of nowhere in the middle of the room and passes through the hatch, wha? Didn't they hire a continuity director on this? If the screamers move through the dirt ground, why are the survivors hiding in a CAVE with a WOODEN DOOR and a DIRT FLOOR? I'll stop there, next! 6. Joke props with magic sounds: Watch the commander use a cheap digital camera to power up a screamer with wires and alligator clips and use voice activation to tell it to "power target". then watch him pull out a long obsolete memory card with "SD" clearly printed on it, plug it into a USB reader, then into a Chinese MP3 player and then tell it "Download all the files, off the hard drive, everything." SCREAMERS HAVE HARDDRIVES?!?!? APPLE AIRBOOKS HAVE SOLID STATE DRIVES, huh? Are those soldiers carrying AIRSOFT guns in most scenes? On a planet with no trees of any kind, where do they get all the wood for the wooden crates, doors, and that silly girl's bow and arrows? Notice the arrow girl when she falls down is showing her "bone" in the most ludicrous of locations, I almost cracked in half laughing at that one.

Okay okay, I think there must have been some 10,000 goofs in this thing, so I'll stop now. Just rent this, or something, drink some beers, call your friends, and get ready for some accidentally brilliant camp comedy!

Not An Original Bone In This Substandard Sequel

[Kage-3 · 3/10 · 15 February 2009]

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.

Awful

[ChrisMichael81 · 1/10 · 1 February 2009]

First off let me say I wanted to like this movie. But it went out of it's way to change my mind. Gina Holden was terrible. She played a soldier, but she looked like a 12 year old in military clothing. The terrible writing was a nice compliment to the terrible acting and casting. How movies like this get funding baffles me. Avoid this movie unless you really have nothing in the world better to do than waste 2 and a half hours of your precious life. If you do watch it laugh with me at the fact that the screamers wont attack you if your wearing a glowing bathroom symbol. Also if all you had to do to stay alive was to wear this symbol you'd probably not lose it right. The first one had very little to work with especially since it was released after the classic terminator series. But the first film tried harder, and was watchable. There were many times were the interaction between the characters, usually involving Gina Holden's character, make you want to look away and cringe she was so bad. In summary this film didn't deserve a 1 but its as low as you can go .

Horrible movie.

[Pipwicky · 2/10 · 31 January 2009]

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.

Not Bad. Good FX. Good Acting. Entertaining

[Rabh17 · 7/10 · 5 April 2009]

This one isn't Movie Theatre grade by any measure. But it aims a little higher than pure "Made-for-TV" or "Direct-to-DVD" offerings.

Mercenary/Rescue mission answers a distress signal coming from a previously thought lost planet/colony from the previous 'Screamer' chapters. They land and attempt to survive while unraveling the aftermath of that world's little "civil war".

Many reviewers will give a thumbs down for the predictability-- but seriously, there's nothing wrong with formula if it entertains. And I think we should give the film makers some credit for not immediately letting the viewer clue in on the plot twist until late into the movie.

The FXs were believable and well done, and the space ship was cool. Even the Uniforms were neat. There's gore, but it was measured and not ridiculously over the top.

This movie is good for a slow Saturday afternoon with munchies. And no- you don't need to see the previous 'Screamer' Installments to understand or enjoy this one.

My main quibble-- Why are some Sci-Fi movies makers always defaulting to a Shot of Mars and the Valles Marineris when they need to posit an alien world orbiting another star? Jeez-- photoshop yer own planet, for chrissakes!

Hunting for a better story.

[lost-in-limbo · 4/10 · 29 June 2009]

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.

Not that bad, good production values

[rlaine · 6/10 · 7 August 2010]

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.

I wish a screamer killed this movie

[andrewfenn-1 · 1/10 · 20 February 2009]

Even if you don't compare it to the first movie this one completely sucked and it's all because of the script.

As per usual the token black guy gets killed simply because another guy losses his "tag" a device which stops the machines from killing you. I wouldn't have a problem with this however the death is stupid, because the tag couldn't have gone far and it contradicts the first movie where being close to a person with a tag on works as well.

The movie reaches another climax of eye rolling with the required romantic sex scene which obviously needs to be put in every movie, only this one makes no sense at all. She meets the guy for less then a day, hardly even talks to him then decides to have sex?! What?!

Another fart in the script is the mistrust between the "unreal" trashcan women and one of the other survivors which leads to the death of the women. Way too much anger from other characters is placed on someone I simply couldn't seeing them really caring much about which makes the whole thing feel artificial.

The special effects can get really bad however I'm not going to criticise them for that seeing as the budget was obviously small, however showing the non-human screamers operating in full view just cheapened the movie and made them look like toy remote control cars.

I wish they didn't end the movie the way it did as it ruins the chances of a good screamers movie ever occurring. The writer ruined the movie then made sure no other good movie could be written after this crap.

I Liked It and I Think You'll Like It

[anberlinrulez · 8/10 · 14 April 2009]

I have to say, I absolutely love Sci-Fi of all types. This movie to me was in the same caliber as Supernova, Aliens 3, and Impostor. I expected low-budget everything but what I got was a perfect presentation. Everything looked high budget from the ship sets to the mine sets, nothing betrayed the fact that this is not a 50 million dollar movie. I couldn't believe it. I can't imagine how someone who loves sci-fi couldn't love this movie. I didn't find anything to be out of order. I liked the kick-ass female lead, the sleazy commander and the rest of the cast was great too. The costumes, weapons, the screamers and the plot were really top-notch and the few gory scenes were done phenomenally. Like another person said, if this is the worst movie you've seen all year, you're having a great year. If you've played the video game Dead Space this movie has the same feel as that game. Hope you like it.

Good B Movie

[jlgrock · 6/10 · 28 September 2010]

This movie is a great rehash of the original. The original Screamers was a low budget movie that had a cult following that had special effect in the vein of Robocop (i.e. Stop motion and bad sets). The actors were all unknown and the plot was horror/action, but just new and interesting enough to gain a cult following.

Fast forward 15 years. This sequel is when a crew receives a distress call from the original mine and they come back. The new movie uses digital cameras, making the quality look better, but also provides an artificial feel to the movie since the "grit" is gone. The special effects and acting hold true to the original. The actors are all unknowns and perform to the quality of any SyFy original movie. The special effects are about what you'd expect from a straight to DVD movie.

Overall, I enjoyed watching the movie. This was in part due to the fact that it forced me to reminisce over the original, but it also provided enough action and horror to stand on its own two feet.

Generic B film

[PenOutOfTime · 5/10 · 1 March 2009]

Take a look at the picture of the cover, as posted on IMDb. Note the rather generic and jaded design, and note that significant elements of the scary imagery seem to be lifted from other well known horror/science-fiction films. If you accept that the cover does in fact reveal the quality of the film, then you will have little reason to be disappointed.

This movie has a serious case of 'sequel-itis', and many of the outstanding points in the original from (some of) the acting, to the costumes, are seriously degraded, but nonetheless, the overall result is of sturdy B-movie grade. Most elements, from plot to acting are 'bad' in the sense that they are liable to be rated rather low in comparison to many other films you might have seen, but they are not generally provokingly bad in and of themselves.

The simplest way of judging whether you should see Screamers: the Hunting if you are interested in the genre and intrigued by the synopsis, would be to ask whether or not you are angered by all mediocrity in movies. If so, avoid. If you can be more tolerant and watch with appropriately restrained expectations, the movie is okay.

Not as bad as you might think.

[jhpstrydom · 9 April 2009]

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.

What a stinker - what will they think of next

[everybody_loves_chandler · 4/10 · 31 January 2009]

Contains Spoilers

What a complete stinker of a movie.

Like Starship Troopers 2 and 3, Screamers : The Hunting suffers from dodgy camera work and a rather weak script (when I mean weak, basically its screamers redone without Petter Weller). Lance Henriksen plays a relatively minor role in the movie and it would of been nice if he had more dialog. Gina Holden does her best but its obvious that she can't pull a rabbit out of her hat to save this flick. Greg Bryk who did such a good job on ReGenesis is a poor choice to play the villain Andy Sexton - he failed to confer the true evil of his characters crimes - though one could argue the script really let him down.

The only redeeming feature is the CGI. It is above average and the new form of screamers are quite frightening to watch.

I gave it a 4 out of 10 because I didn't completely fast forward this movie.

Watch something else.

Standard mish-mash SciFi sequel

[jens-larsson · 2/10 · 7 February 2009]

This is a great example of what not to do with a potential great SciFi franchise. I absolutely loved the original movie, one of my all time favorite SciFi flicks, and i knew that this movie couldn't get close to the feeling in the first one. So in my mind i was already prepared for a semi bad SciFi, witch is OK with me, because thats still a SciFi. But even though i was set for a bad one, i got disappointed.

Everything about this movie was bad. The actors where bad, except for Lance Henriksen. The ships interior where "home made" (comon people, where is the dirt?!). The landscape, locations, sets, wardrobe and technology don't match the original movie. This all feels like it's on another planet, and if they had gone in that direction with the story it could have worked, but they didn't.

But i will give the makeup department some credits, because some of the monster effects looks really good. Thats why i gave it a two instead of one.

Don't waste your time on this one.

Not great, but not as bad as they say

[sarastro7 · 5/10 · 10 February 2009]

I (re)watched Screamers just before watching Screamers: The Hunting, and while I'm not a big fan of the first movie (I rate it a 5), I must say that the plot in the sequel was surprisingly coherent and had many consistent references to the original movie. It was a direct continuation, in many ways building very logically on the events of the first movie, even trying to up the stakes with the ending.

The acting was of dubious quality, the budget was low (no decent explosions!), and there wasn't much character development, nor any really cool one-liners, but, other than that, this was a very decent effort, quite spectacularly achieving pretty much the same style and level of quality as the original. So, not too bad at all, and no skin off the original's nose! Another 5'er. I dare say fans of the original ought to like this. It's more horror than sci-fi (and *very* Alien-inspired!), but it uses the premise of the first movie to very good effect. This sequel is a movie that achieves what it sets out to do. Too bad it's *still* not very good... but that's just my opinion.

5 out of 10.

Better special effects but loses originality

[breakdownthatfilm-blogspot-com · 6/10 · 26 July 2012]

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.

Just purely horrendous!

[janhildebrand-1 · 1/10 · 6 March 2009]

Whoever claims this movie is watchable must be totally blind or mentaly lobotomized. It is by far the worst film I have seen for decades! The producers and Director probably thought it would be a good marketing idea to steal some concepts from great sci-fi movies like "Alien" especially part 1 and 2).

At the beginning the crew wakes up from a 2 months space travel (copy from Alien). A Wanna-be-Ripley (Gina Holden), worst actress ever, wakes up from a nightmare with screamers (copy from Aliens). A squad of armed men and women prepares to go to the surface to rescue the survivors (copy again!!) and they only have a few days before the planet is hit by a killer asteroid (well who would have thought of that after 2 months of space travel). And it goes on and on with copies like that except that the dialogs and scenarios are plain diarrhea. They even got one of the main actors from the "Aliens" series (Lance Henriksen)and totally amazed how the hell they did it! He must have read the wrong script or something.

The script just wants you to spit out your guts and if you haven't given up after the first 30 minutes that seemed like endless hours of pure boredom you got guts! No surprises whatsoever and hopeless dialogs for the rest of the movie. An end of movie that is totally obnoxious and so unrealistic that even born sci-fi fans would cry out loud "omg!wtf!!". And by the way again the last 10 minutes a failed copy from Aliens.

All in all, I felt nauseous after watching this "monster" and the only reason I managed to finish it was because I wanted to comment on it on IMDb and to make sure nobody else has to go through this dreadful, horrendous piece of s...!!

Better Than Expected

[filmsploitation · 6/10 · 28 April 2009]

Phil's Quick Capsule Review: A better than expected DTV (and very belated) sequel to the 90's Peter Weller Sci-Fi horror film. Whilst most DTV sequels suffer from bad acting, poor script and cheap effects, The Hunting ticks only the bad acting box and instead delivers some nice moments including human Screamers. Not original then but fun.

Best Bit: Human Screamers

IMDb Rating: 6/10

If you liked this try: Aliens (9/10); Screamers (6/10); Starship Troopers 3 (4/10)

Phil Hobden For more reviews check out http://www.mod-life.net/modlife/index_ugly.htm

Screamers:The Hunting

[Scarecrow-88 · 5/10 · 15 November 2009]

Sequel to the cult favorite, Screamers, follows a space crew from Earth ordered to answer a distress signal regarding human survivors on the mining planet of Sirius 6B. Robot creatures, which move underground, nicknamed "screamers"(..because they make a loud screeching sound before contact with victims), are actively evolving, now capable of fusing mechanically with human body parts, which makes them an even greater threat. Also on it's way is a meteor storm which will destroy Sirius 6B and so the crew must avoid the perilous danger from the screamers, find any survivors and escape within a 6 day window. Making matters worse is when a screamer drains the fuel cells of the crew's ship, forcing them to find a source of power elsewhere. Finding a small group of miners still alive, the crew hopes that they can lead them to the fuel cells needed to get off the planet before it is destroyed by the meteor shower. As long as the screamers are active, this will not be easy.

Lance Henriksen shows up about an hour in as Orsow, a scientist who understands the screamers because he actually was the one who designed them. Plenty of bloody gore as the screamers tear apart victims, both as little bug-like robots and in half-human, half-robot hybrid form. A mix of computer graphics and practical effects, not too bad, I've seen much worse. Plenty of exciting action set pieces, but nothing that extraordinary or earth-shattering. You can see that the budget is a bit less than the first, understandably so considering this sequel comes 14 years after the original. Sorely lacking a Peter Weller to buoy the cast, Greg Bryk is more accustomed to portraying villains, and is pretty much a major reason the crew faces such difficulties, setting off the army of screamers after turning one on to collect logarithms which would provide his superiors with advanced technology for purposes of war..he portrays Commander Andy Sexton, the leader of the crew. Gina Holden, as Lt. Victoria Bronte, portrays Joe Hendricksson's(Weller)daughter, getting involved with a mysterious miner. The remaining cast, either portraying members of Sexton's crew or those miners found still alive, become casualties along the way. Important scenes, explaining the evolution of the screamers, include the crew's finding a factory containing an assembly line of screamers reaching for miles, and what appear to be tortured humans imprisoned behind an electromagnetic field(..released by the crew who think the miners are mere savages keeping them for a food supply). There's a twist I think many viewers will see coming a mile away, but the ending is shocking enough. The running threat of the robots(..or their technology)reaching Earth is always present.

quite plane but relatively OK movie

[emil-149 · 8/10 · 31 January 2009]

OK movie , a crossover between Terminator and Aliens. The story is the week point in this movie. The filming looks really good. And the actors are decent. All the computer animation looks real and thats part of why the movie is good.. Im thinking about the scene when the space ship is landing and so on... Other vise I have to say the story is weak because its just a another space movie with things trying to kill them.

The storm that is coming is also lame... but its a movie that could be good if you haven't watched a lot of aliens and terminator movies. If you have it will be a little dull. And the ending is not a great one....

eMiL peace out

not quite what it seems

[A_Different_Drummer · 7/10 · 18 January 2016]

This review is using the "oeuvre" approach in which the history of the work matters.

Essentially this is an indirect homage to the original. I say indirect because the reflex in the Canadian industry to do knockoffs of any script with a pulse is so ingrained you could argue that the homage was accidental in the process of doing another knockoff.

Still with me? Now SCREAMERS I is right up there with Cube and RobocopI as representing the cream of the Canuck film machine. Early on the Canadians while busy producing cheap knockoffs of US content accidentally discovered that occasionally they do do something really special on a small budget.

Screamers I was one such accidental hit. It was not merely a good film but holds up well today and heck if you have not seen it lets stop jabbering so you can go find a copy.

This film, Screamers 2 (they say a S3 is in production but who knows?) repeats many of the same themes, with a little less enthusiasm and a lot smaller budget.

It is not a bad film. Especially if you miss S1 and need your screamers fix.

Otherwise stick with the original

Giving it a two but it should have never been made.

[brianbcollins · 2/10 · 15 November 2019]

Why is sound creation the first listed credit? This movie just went from bad to worse. Is that sound guy like a big deal or something? I don't even care to look. What a terrible attempt at sequel. The first was pretty good. From the looks of this if they get a quarter of the funding of the second they will make it even more terrible with film students working for free. Absolute garbage all around from crew to action, sorry Greg.

Do some calculations

[Spin97 · 4/10 · 15 October 2020]

This is a typical b movie the acting is bad special effects are non excistant and to top it all off the movie doesnt stick to the original story. In the original the element Berinium was found on the planet 20 years before the movie takes place then jump to the second movie and suddenly its 85 years prior yet the commander escaped the planet 13 years prior. So that makes it 33 years before the element was found on the planet and 13 years after the original movie. If you make a second movie then please learn how to count.