IMDb RATING
3.4/10
1.9K
YOUR RATING
Military scientists discover an alternate dimension and, subsequently, aliens with an appetite for human flesh.Military scientists discover an alternate dimension and, subsequently, aliens with an appetite for human flesh.Military scientists discover an alternate dimension and, subsequently, aliens with an appetite for human flesh.
Featured reviews
Scientists at a secret underground complex have found a way to travel to another dimension. Three dimension-travelers are the first to go through the gate - but are soon attacked by something that interrupts the communication with Earth. This horrible something uses the gate to travel back to the underground complex. Most of the staff are evacuated, except four heavily-armed militaries and Dr. Casserly and Dr. Summerfield who just can't stand each other. It turns out that the creature is a alien monster that craves human flesh. Not the best horror film I've seen. Some very nice creature effects and the filmmakers sling some pretty cool gore at us but There's virtually no tension, suspense or atmosphere. It was dull, too, why were all the sets so foggy? Couldn't they afford proper lighting? Or were the sets even complete? It's an OK time waster at best, at worst... 4/10.
The original Xtro was a British sci-fi horror film from the early 80's. It was very silly indeed but pretty original and strange. I guess you could describe it as a minor cult movie. Its director, Harry Davenport, returned almost a decade later to make an American sequel called, perhaps unsurprisingly, Xtro II. This one is only vaguely related to the previous film at best. It's set in an underground military laboratory that is experimenting with travelling to other dimensions. They send a swat team to one such place, it's disastrous and one of the team returns only for an aggressive alien to burst out of her stomach and escape into the facility. The remaining personnel must avoid being torn apart by the monster.
It should be clear from the synopsis that this flick owes a fair bit to Alien. But the truth is that this one isn't even nearly as good as the uneven original Xtro, far less Ridley Scott's master-work. Probably the single biggest problem is the location. Almost all films set in confined military bases are usually tedious and terrible. The limited sets are good for a low budget but very boring. This one is no exception with lots of dark corridors and very little variety. The movie stars Jan-Michael 'Airwolf' Vincent. He's not very good and puts in a thoroughly disinterested performance.
Overall, very forgettable.
It should be clear from the synopsis that this flick owes a fair bit to Alien. But the truth is that this one isn't even nearly as good as the uneven original Xtro, far less Ridley Scott's master-work. Probably the single biggest problem is the location. Almost all films set in confined military bases are usually tedious and terrible. The limited sets are good for a low budget but very boring. This one is no exception with lots of dark corridors and very little variety. The movie stars Jan-Michael 'Airwolf' Vincent. He's not very good and puts in a thoroughly disinterested performance.
Overall, very forgettable.
Xtro, the original movie, was a British production involving an abducted father who comes back for his son, transforming him into an alien like himself and raising Hell for his ex-wife and friends.
This movie has nothing even resembling anything like that, with the exception of the director.
It is a bad sign when a movie sequel manages to forget some of what happened in the previous movie. It is a terrible sign when it completely ignores every thing like the plot, characters, situations, et al.
Even worse is when you hire Jan Michael Vincent at the height of his addiction phase, when he was on the verge of getting bounced from Airwolf for his drunken antics. His underwhelming presence in this film is a great display of the depths he had sunken to already.
This movie has nothing even resembling anything like that, with the exception of the director.
It is a bad sign when a movie sequel manages to forget some of what happened in the previous movie. It is a terrible sign when it completely ignores every thing like the plot, characters, situations, et al.
Even worse is when you hire Jan Michael Vincent at the height of his addiction phase, when he was on the verge of getting bounced from Airwolf for his drunken antics. His underwhelming presence in this film is a great display of the depths he had sunken to already.
I have seen all of the "Alien" films. I loved the "Alien" films. But the one I loved best was "Aliens", partly because of James Cameron's brilliant writing and directing, but mostly because I loved the guns. Oh, the guns! The M41-A Pulse Rifle rocked, but even better than that was the mighty Smartgun. I am a "connoisseur" of Alien ripoffs. So naturally, when I heard that this movie had a smartgun-like weapon in it, my response was, of course, "where can I find this movie?" After searching I finally came across it, and popped it in my DVD player.
Wow.
This movie absolutely blew me away with its unrelenting "Aliens"-style tense action, but mostly I was pleasantly surprised to find not only a smartgun-like weapon, but a near perfect smartgun replica! I was practically vibrating in my seat when I saw that thing fire.
But aside from the gun, I generally enjoyed the movie. It didn't have a "feel-good" happy- skippy ending, but it didn't have a "everyone dies" ending, which I appreciate (though the ending does confuse me a bit...) The creature design was brilliant. In all the "Alien" ripoffs I've seen, (besides the later "Alien Lockdown", which is more of a PredAlien anyways) this by far had the best creature. It even did the famous "headbite", but with its whole head! Altogether, I enjoyed this movie more than "Alien Resurrection" and "Alien 3 " combined.
Overall, I recommend this movie if you are a fan of "Alien" ripoffs, and have the patience for a bit of wooden acting.
Wow.
This movie absolutely blew me away with its unrelenting "Aliens"-style tense action, but mostly I was pleasantly surprised to find not only a smartgun-like weapon, but a near perfect smartgun replica! I was practically vibrating in my seat when I saw that thing fire.
But aside from the gun, I generally enjoyed the movie. It didn't have a "feel-good" happy- skippy ending, but it didn't have a "everyone dies" ending, which I appreciate (though the ending does confuse me a bit...) The creature design was brilliant. In all the "Alien" ripoffs I've seen, (besides the later "Alien Lockdown", which is more of a PredAlien anyways) this by far had the best creature. It even did the famous "headbite", but with its whole head! Altogether, I enjoyed this movie more than "Alien Resurrection" and "Alien 3 " combined.
Overall, I recommend this movie if you are a fan of "Alien" ripoffs, and have the patience for a bit of wooden acting.
I saw this movie for the first time when I was a young teenager, and I actually liked it. I honestly couldn't tell that the acting was bad, the suspense was absent, the plot was non-existent. So, is it then safe to say that this movie probably was made by young teenagers, unaware of the different aspects that make a good sci-fi/horror movie work? I had the chance to re-watch it last night, so I did. Better had not done it, because it's another childhood memory shattered.
This movie indeed is a shameless ALIEN rip-off. There's a chest-burster-scene, there's a BIG gun attached to a soldier's body like in ALIENS, there are soldiers crawling through air-shafts with somebody looking at a monitor telling them the creature's closing in on them,...
It's a shame, really, because the 'other dimension'-concept had potential. The film-makers should have shown more of it. Like the soldiers scouting the landscape or them entering the dome you see in the distance. Actually, you don't see sh!t. Just some fuzzy transmitted images on a monitor. I guess they didn't have the budget to write all that in the screenplay, since they clearly used only three sets or so.
I'm still trying to figure out why I liked this movie back then. I think because there's some mild gore in it (chest- & face-bursting and an exploding dude at the end), but they cut away from it too quickly. So it must have been the creature, which looks reasonable (but still rubbery) and fairly dangerous when it shows its teeth, but it moves way too slow.
Anyway, I'm waisting too much words on this crappy movie. The important thing is: XTRO II: The Second Encounter is actually no sequel to XTRO (1983). The two movies have absolutely NOTHING in common. I even think the first XTRO is worth tracking down and watching it, 'cause it's a peculiar and unique little sci-fi/horror-gem. XTRO II is not. But if you want to see every possible ALIEN rip-off: Be my guest.
This movie indeed is a shameless ALIEN rip-off. There's a chest-burster-scene, there's a BIG gun attached to a soldier's body like in ALIENS, there are soldiers crawling through air-shafts with somebody looking at a monitor telling them the creature's closing in on them,...
It's a shame, really, because the 'other dimension'-concept had potential. The film-makers should have shown more of it. Like the soldiers scouting the landscape or them entering the dome you see in the distance. Actually, you don't see sh!t. Just some fuzzy transmitted images on a monitor. I guess they didn't have the budget to write all that in the screenplay, since they clearly used only three sets or so.
I'm still trying to figure out why I liked this movie back then. I think because there's some mild gore in it (chest- & face-bursting and an exploding dude at the end), but they cut away from it too quickly. So it must have been the creature, which looks reasonable (but still rubbery) and fairly dangerous when it shows its teeth, but it moves way too slow.
Anyway, I'm waisting too much words on this crappy movie. The important thing is: XTRO II: The Second Encounter is actually no sequel to XTRO (1983). The two movies have absolutely NOTHING in common. I even think the first XTRO is worth tracking down and watching it, 'cause it's a peculiar and unique little sci-fi/horror-gem. XTRO II is not. But if you want to see every possible ALIEN rip-off: Be my guest.
Did you know
- TriviaThis sequel has nothing to do the original Xtro (1982). This is because director Harry Bromley Davenport somehow retained the rights to the name Xtro but not the story rights. Needing money he enlisted writers to write a completely different film and only use the Xtro name to capitalize on the cult success of the original.
- Quotes
Zunoski: Dying's not so bad. We'll be back in a new body before you know it.
Dr. Julie Casserly: Yeah? Well, I just got this one in shape.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Xtro Xposed (2005)
Details
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content

Top Gap
By what name was Xtro II: The Second Encounter (1991) officially released in India in English?
Answer