|Page 1 of 2:|| |
|Index||13 reviews in total|
3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
guilty pleasure, 29 December 2008
Author: lilacwinejunkie from United States
In a word, fun.
This movie is not deep or meant to make you think - but its completely enjoyable. The supporting cast is surprisingly good - especially Elizabeth Gracen and Adrienne Wilkinson. They both rose to the challenge - and surpassed the writing they were given. The special effects were better than I expected, given the lower budget - and the outdoor scenes were quite beautiful - filmed in Eastern Europe somewhere.
I would recommend it to people just looking for a good time. Check out the DVD for out takes and some hilarious special features.
4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
This movie is not bad, 2 April 2006
Author: S-Reisner from United States
I just watched the last hour of this on sci-fi channel and I really
liked it. The special effects are bad, but that just goes along with
most sci-fi movies these days. The alien was totally bad-ass and there
was plenty of violence and gore. The high-tech weapons they used were
awesome and original, the alien regenarting it's leg after it was shot
off added to the problem of the unkillable alien.
From what I could see, the hero's were trappped inside a military base where there were nuclear weapons that they'd have to shut down. This movie is somewhat predictable, but isn't every movie these days? Just watch this movie expecting blood and a shape shifting alien hunting a group of commando's. What more do you want?
2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
A good supporting cast, 23 September 2007
Author: xenatorres from Canada
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
The first "Inceptor Force" was a horrible movie. I'm shocked anyone
even discussed making a sequel, let alone made one. Olivier Gruner is
perhaps one of the worst actors alive. He has no business being in the
business, let alone to star in a film.
Thankfully he does have a good supporting cast behind him, which does help to salvage the movie. I enjoyed Elizabeth Gracen's performance, despite the film's need to take the tough female soldier and have her be the one who breaks down and stars to freak out. It made no sense to make this hardened soldier be the one to freak out when the movie had a built in character who could logically freak out, Dawn DeSilvia, the scientist, brilliant played by Adrienne Wilkinson, though, I will admit, it was less predictable to have the scientist get to be one of the most collected characters.
3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Pretty good! yet borrows many ideas from other movies, 17 July 2003
Author: Jakob_Karlsson from Sweden
The Interception team is once again on a mission to wipe out an alien
form. The last time, Lambert (Olivier Gruner) was the only one left alive
his team. The new alien have wiped out a millitary base in Russia and
captured a nuclear reactor. The reactor houses the worst kind of uranium
can imagine. An explosion could effect the whole world. Lambert and his
team head to Russia.
Interceptor Force 2 (also titled Alpha Force) is a pretty good movie. But there are some stuff that makes you annoyed, like the alien's abilities, the same as T-1000 in Terminator 2, shape shifting and if it explode it floats back together.
The shape shifting I dont mind that much this time, those are pretty good with nice effects. Unlike the first movie Gruner sometimes actually fights with the alien form and not a human everytime they make contact.
The action and fight scenes are good, so are the most of the special effects, and that is a must to make this movie work, because the Alien is all CGI.
Olivier Gruner seems to work in the right direction again thinking of his lates very poor movies Cracker Jack 3, GOD and Deadly Engagement to name a few. He is to good to be cast in those kind of movies. Together with Olivier, Roger R. Cross makes a strong performance.
I give it 5/10
6 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
What? Brad's gone? See ya., 2 February 2004
Author: jaywolfenstien from USA
All the mistakes of the first film multiplied by two. Subtract Brad Dourif.
And add an unwelcomed (not to mentioned incredibly predictable) conspiracy
involving (gasp) the Russians! Don't make it obvious you guys read the Cold
War edition of the `12 Step Plan to Writing Scripts' handbook . . . that's
The alien is female this time around (Species III?) whee! It takes on a human female form frequently for a Tomb Raider/Charlie's Angel/tough girl approach? Can I get a yawn for yet another gimmick?
Part of me wants to call it on being inconsistent with its predecessor in that the alien no longer seems to be able to exist biologically and as energy simultaneously . . . but frankly I don't care enough to verify that tidbit by watching the first film again.
This film feels even more childish than its predecessor. The plot honestly feels like two kids in the first grade talking about an alien:
Kid 1 - `Well, I'm gonna use my ultra-magneto-super-duper-ray-gun! That'll kill it!' Kid 2 - `Nuh-uh! My alien is immune to that! You can't kill it!'
And so the characters prove yet again that the thing is bullet proof. For all the gunfire and fights, there isn't a lick of intensity to the entire movie. Making a creature that can't be killed comes across as a whiny brat who makes up excuses for the damn thing to survive, and that is not intense.
If you know of two kids under age ten who like to one-up each other when they play war, watch them instead of this. It has to be more entertaining and less irritating.
8 out of 15 people found the following review useful:
Just shoot me!, 22 August 2004
Author: Atlant G. Schmidt from Nashua, NH
At one point, one of the American "Interceptor Force" officers asks a
Russian officer "What are
you going to do, shoot me?" The Russian, in a wery, wery bad accent,
replies, "No, I'm not
goink to shoot you."
What a sadistic guy! He could have saved that poor character the entire rest of the movie if he had just shot him right then and there.
And after you watch this movie, you'll wish he had shot you too.
Your only hope of surviving this movie is to warm up your best possible MST3K impression right from the first frame; otherwise, you are beink doomed!
Good fun, 26 May 2012
Author: blackandangrywhiteman from United Kingdom
My brother picked this one up from a bargain bin based on its horrific DVD cover and the film delivered. Horrific CGI even for 2002, bad acting, horrific script, plot holes, full of errors, everything you'd expect from a TV movie sequel and it was a lot of fun. Only an idiot would go into this film expecting a multiple award winning, summer blockbuster of the year. If you are able to not take this film seriously, you have an entertaining Thing/Terminator 2 esque (in the loosest sense) sci-fi flick full of great action sequences and classic clichés. Recommended for fans of 80s/90s action films and Roger Corman's work.
1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
So-so Sci Fi, 22 February 2009
Author: Ray Humphries from Wilkesboro NC
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This wasn't too bad. At least the action moves along even if motivated
by gratuitous violence. I didn't have to fast forward through ennui
saturated sequences at all. There's always enough shooting and
(unnecessary) hand-to-hand to keep one's attention. I thought the CGI
was more than adequate, and the morphing really well done, although the
frequency of occurrence didn't seem necessary.
As for the cast, well what can you say. Gruner is *not* the next Van Damme. He may be no more (nor less) talented, but he's not nearly as pretty. And the chicks weren't all that hot either, but I did like Miss Wilkenson's role and and I guess she's kinda cute.
The plot is a plethora of clichés, but what the Hey. I view these Sci Fi Channel scripts as parking spots for writer wannabes. If these guys were any good, they'd have real jobs for real studios, writing scripts for real movies. For instance, perhaps some aspiring nuclear engineer can help explain why a dozen or so barrels/kegs (?) of HCl would be stored in a nuclear power station? Given this stuff will dissolve/react with nearly everything except glass, stomach lining and gold, one can be assured the screen writers majored in neither engineering nor chemistry.
5 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
About the Girls, 25 January 2003
Author: (email@example.com) from Bassett, VA
This was a great movie for me because it had 2 of my favorite actresses. Elizabeth Gracen is wonderful, and did a good job in this movie. Her swimming scene near the end was really cool. Adrienne Wilkinson did well with a subdued role as a scientist, and still managed to show who she is. She was real cute at the end, when she got sexy, then embarrassed. The other main actors were good also. I'll probably watch it again.
1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Not good, 18 July 2005
Author: god_hammer13 from Australia
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
this really isn't a good movie , even considering the low standards of
Olivier Gruner and the fact that this is a B film. it's still not worth
watching. This movie makes itself hard to be taken seriously with the
over-the-top looking guns and the non-existent romance between Olivier
Gruner and Adrienne Wilkinson , wow we totally say like two things to
each other throughout the whole movie so that means that we have some
sort of deep bond at the end. Even though this is a sci-fi this movie
lacks a lot of realism, one example of this is when a man wearing a
protective suit enters a nuclear power plant then our hero's enter with
no form of protective clothing at all, there is also a whole bunch of
other small mistakes too many to write. another thing i didn't like
about this film was the plot , this movie doesn't know what direction
it's heading at first your think it's about a shape-shifting alien
hell-bent on revenge then halfway through the film we have some nuclear
bombs or something. Anyhow the plot is really lame.
|Page 1 of 2:|| |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|External reviews||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|