this movie feels even more like Gremlins than the first movie becoming more of a comedy than a horror at times which is not necessarily a bad thing depending on your preference and in some ways I think this movie is actually better the first and in others its slightly worst but still an easy recommendation if you like mini monster movies
Critters 2 is a solid sequel. It's not as good as the original but only by a smidge. Mick Garris (Sleepwalkers) got his feet wet with this horror sequel and like any good sequel should do it expands the mythology and introduces us to some new elements. Although it's not as scary as the first this one is way funnier. And by focusing more on the humor it looses just a bit of luster. Our ginger hero from the original returns to his hometown to visit his grandmother for Easter and the leftover eggs hatch. Suddenly the little horrors attack the town and the bounty hunters return this time with Charlie and a new addition Leigh who continuously takes new forms but spends most of it's time as a playmate centerfold. But the problem gets way bigger as there numbers increase and a mega critter ball is formed. The movie is so fun with insane practical effects and a crazy, playful vibe due to Garris's confident and creative direction. All in all a wild ride.
Budget: $4m
Box Office: $3.8m
3.75/5
Though it's somewhat better than its predecessor, largely through sheer directorial and photographic panache, it's still pretty disreputable and mindless. [29 Apr 1988, p.4]
As sequels go, Critters 2: The Main Course is particularly bereft of imagination. Save for the opening 20 or 30 minutes, the film is pretty much a clone of the original.
Critters 2 piles up every stock movie idea you can remember about small-town heroism, macho sheriffs and alien invaders. But whenever it shows a glimmer of wit about those cliches, it leaps back to its safe, dull, derivative style.
It lacks all of the style and sense of fun of the original Critters (1986) and has no reason for existence - aside, of course, from the fact that Critters is a brand name and this is the current model.
A handful of sight gags does not a movie make.
Critters 2 has a couple of truly classic scenes. The scene during Easter and the rolling conclusion being the most standout scenes. However, it's overly goofy and simply not scary. It feels like a bunch of random ideas thrown together with little cohesion.. like it was designed by a studio committee.
After a relatively satisfying first movie, this movie had everything to jumpstart the franchise. However, after seeing it, I think that not everything went well, there are many problems, it is a film clearly made to earn money effectively. Even so, it managed to maintain the level of the initial film and give us an interesting and fun sequence, even though the freshness of the first film is lacking, and the comic situations are rarer and less well conceived (my highlight being the pitiful scene with the Easter Bunny, with less fun than a bachelor great-uncle joke during Christmas Eve).
In this film, Brad Brown returns to the quiet village where, a few years earlier, he faced an invasion of carnivorous creatures that nearly killed his family. Now, however, he is a very bizarre celebrity, and most people regard him as a liar or a nutcase who wanted to catch the eye with a fanciful story. However, he will be quickly avenged when new creatures appear, from a lot of eggs left untouched which will inadvertently be used by the parish for the Easter festivities. The stage is set for another movie where these creatures will threaten the lives of all those who come across them.
The cast retains the participation of Scott Grimes, who is the protagonist here. The actor fulfilled his role very well and gives us a solid performance. Barry Corbin is also back and maintains the level of the first film. Terrence Mann brings to life the sidereal bounty hunter who comes to help humans to fight those ravening creatures. Unfortunately, he doesn't seem as committed as he did in the first film. Don Keith Oper does relatively well with a bizarre character, in which the actor works hard and manages to imprint his own captivating charisma. Liane Curtis is less happy in her effort, with a lukewarm performance.
On a technical level, the film is quite uninteresting. I start by notifying you for some nude content, not suitable for a family movie and which may be inadvisable for minors. Once this warning has been made, we can retain our gaze on the halfhearted cinematography, with faded colors, without limpidity. The best technical aspect turns out to be the visual and special effects, as well as the creatures, which are fun and have a very well-imagined look. The sets and costumes fulfill their role without major demerits, in opposition to a cheap soundtrack and sound effects, which really leave a lot to be desired.