Uriah43 This movie begins in a top-secret laboratory where a private corporation named is conducting genetic experiments on animals. However, when two agents for the NSA infiltrate the lab and get killed by one of the animals, management makes the decision to destroy all of the evidence as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, the lead scientist named "Steve Malceno" (Jonathan Farwell) doesn't agree with this decision and allows the most dangerous specimen to escape. This decision has disastrous consequences for everybody in its path. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that, rather than being a true sequel, this film is essentially a remake of the original movie. Although not quite as good, in my opinion, as its predecessor it is compensated to a certain degree by the presence of Marc Singer (as "Paul Ferguson"), Tracy Scoggins ("Barbara White") and to a limited extent Irene Miracle ("Sarah Ferguson"). There was also some humor here and there which certainly didn't hurt either. But even so, the predictable plot and lack of suspense definitely affected this film and for that reason I have rated it accordingly. Slightly below average.

frankbob_monkey More like the novel than the original, but still unsatisfying. Had its parts that where fun, but still kinda corny. Quality was dark and couldn't see what was going 80% of the time. But still I liked it.Original seemed to be more satisfying, but if your looking for a more novel like movie of Watchers - Watch it. 6/10 Because it wasn't boring, and I enjoyed a few more scenes. Yeah, watch it. Hey, it was better than the Koontz adaptation of Phantoms and Hideaway.IMDb won't let me place this unless its longer.Fine. I do own this on DVD, so it's not too bad. But if you want a REALLY GOOD Koontz adaptation see DEMON SEED. Now thats excellent. WATCH IT!!!!!

gridoon This sequel to "Watchers" is just a reworking of the original. Or, more accurately, it uses Dean Koontz's original story as the basis for yet another "Predator" knock-off. Pretty lame, with some terribly unconvincing effects (check out that severed head), but an amazingly well-trained dog yet again saves the day (i.e., at least makes the movie bearable). (*1/2)

HumanoidOfFlesh Oh yeah,"Watchers 2" is really bad,but certainly more enjoyable than "Grim" or "Haunted Sea".The acting is passable and the dog is smarter than every person in this movie.The monster is lame looking,the gore is almost non-existent and there's also no suspense at all.I still think that this one is slightly better than "Watchers"(1988)with its extremely laughable "monster",but not as good as "Watchers 3"(1994)-very stupid,but gory and fun to watch monster flick set in the jungle.Recommended,if you like this sort of stuff.