Scanners II: The New Order - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Scanners II: The New Order Reviews

Page 1 of 3
March 3, 2015
i fucking want to see it and i dont care what u think!!
½ June 6, 2014
The first and best in a line of direct to video sequels and spin-offs to The classic body horror flick. More gore, grossout fx and a darker tone keep it from being another poor horror/sci-fi sequel!
½ January 13, 2014
Didn't mind this sequel even if it's not in the same class as the original. The effects are still pretty good for the time and the main lead can act unlike a lot of the rest of the cast.
½ October 13, 2013
Going into a sequel to Scanners that features no involvement from David Cronenberg whatsoever, I had expected Scanners II: The New Order to be more than inferior to the original film. I was right, but it's not for lack of trying. I think that the film has some good ideas, but unfortunately, it doesn't do enough with them. The makeup effects and score are pretty good, but the storyline itself doesn't seem to really pay off that well. David Hewlett takes the lead as a new-found Scanner who stumbles upon a plot by a crooked police chief to take control of the city using Scanners. So it more or less picks up where the last one left off, but it's just inferior to the previous film. It's not altogether bad, and Hewlett does a pretty good job with his role, but it just feels more like a step back rather than forward. It's worth a watch but not much more.
May 3, 2013
This is a science-fiction movie loosely connected to the original Scanners. I can't give this one much credit for creativity since the setting and the themes covered are similar to those in the first movie. The acting is uneven but most lead actors do at least an OK job. The special effects are nice but far from impressive.
March 13, 2013
If you loved the first film, you have to give this one a try..... it's entertaining, it have good cinematography and a clever little story of world domination to entertain fans.....
October 27, 2012
Poor story with some ridiculous overly dramatic dialogue and acting. Here, a policeman attempts to use scanners to become the chief of police and later has intentions of running the city as mayor. Bad directing.
May 7, 2012
Good follow up from from the first film, but not as much gore.
February 13, 2012
Commits the greatest sin, by being boring. Looks and feels like bad TV.
November 5, 2011
Ha belegondolok Cronenberg egyik legnagyobb siker√ (C)nek is tekinthetŇ' a Scanners, az √°ltala rendezett elsŇ' r√ (C)szt k√∂vetett m√ (C)g k√ (C)t folytat√°s √ (C)s egy k√ (C)tr√ (C)szes spin-off sorozat a Scanner Cop. Persze ezek a folytat√°sok nem t√ļl j√≥k √ (C)s csak a fejsz√ (C)trobbant√°sok magasabb sz√°m√°ban m√ļlj√°k fel√ 1/4l az elŇ'd√∂t. A Cronenbergre jellemzŇ' technikai-tudom√°ny-ember interf√ (C)sz csak nyomokban bukkan fel √ (C)s akkor sem √ (C)lvezhetj√ 1/4k sok√°ig mert mindig k√∂veti egy olcs√≥ akci√≥jelenet. A Scanners 2-3 teljesen egy (k√∂zepes) minŇ's√ (C)gi kateg√≥ri√°ba tartozik, egyszer ok√ (C)s.
December 18, 2010
Scanners II was a better sequel than would be anticipated after such a long wait. It takes itself seriously and at points is believable. Also the ending song is sick which I have on mp3 plater.
½ December 4, 2010
One of the first things I ever saw David Hewlett in! One of my favourite actors (Stargate Atlantis forever!) A much younger Hewlett. Kind of lame as sequels go but I love it because of him. It also has Raoul Trujillo in it playing a pretty awesome evil scanner. He's a great actor.
August 18, 2010
not a bad sequel but not on par with orginal - couldnt really take the original into a new dimension and lacks substance
Super Reviewer
May 26, 2010
This was a sci-fi movie that could have been a little better. Basic plot is about a world that has some people who have the ability of telekinesis. They call them scanners. And there are those who want to control the scanners for their own reasons. The story is decent enough. But some of the F/X and acting could have been much better. Not a big name cast in this. More of a lower budget sci-fi film. Might be worth a watch if you enjoyed the other scanner films.
½ February 20, 2010
What a quality sequel. And i dont say that very often. Great stuff.
February 18, 2010
(* 1/2): Thumbs Down

Just another one of those horrible 90's sequels to a successful sci-fi/horror film.
November 28, 2009
a corruption of the initial film. the story woven is unbelievable the acting shameful and just nothing as the first one
August 5, 2009
I was all set to...not curse this movie with every scrap of feeling left in me, up until about the halfway point, when David Hewlett (he was in The Cube!) visits his parents and they pass on to him certain SHOCKING REVELATIONS which upset me more than they upset him, as its at that precise moment that we see the SHOCKING extent to which the original has been raped. Going in to detail about that would be spoiler territory (like anyone fucking cares) so I'd better not, which is probably just as well as if I did I'd probably wear my fingers into bloody stumps punching the keys.

That aside, Scanners 2 is one of those movies that throws up a new plothole or inconsistency every couple of minutes, but most of these aren't important - the ones that bothered me were the ones that directly contradicted the original. Here are the two main offenders:

First of all, when did the ability to Scan cease to be a crippling condition? In the original, a Scanner could not function around even relatively small groups of people without being bombarded with the thoughts of those around them - something which would cause the Scanner unbearable pain. Yet in this film, our hero David Hewlett (he played Worth in The Cube!) is in medical School and seems fine, except that recently he's been getting occasional headaches. Scanning appears to have gone from an uncontrollable condition (without the use of ephemerol, anyway - more on that later) to a source of minor discontent and the film never explains when or how this change occured.

And second, what in the name of fuck actually happened to ephemerol? In this film, a doctor tries to help Scanners supress the negative effects of their condition (which, as we've seen, aren't all that bad anymore) with a drug called EPH-2, which as well as being more addictive than even the finest heroine, produces some very unpleasant side-effects, such as making the user dead. But we already know from the first film that ephemerol also supresses the effects of scanning and it didn't turn anyone into junkies or corpses, so why not just use that? I know both those points sound nit-picky, but you have to understand that the first film was a complete, self-contained film that set its own mythology forth in no uncertain terms. That a sequel made nine years after the fact should forget these things is unforgivable; that it's done out of sheer stupidity rather than any particular malice makes it no less so.

Right. I'll leave you with my favourite line, said after David Hewlett (The Cube was a good movie, though, wasn't it?) admits to his soon-to-be girlfriend that he's been getting headaches:

"Well at least you don't have canine encephalitis!"
½ June 22, 2009
Ho and hum! David Hewlett is pretty decent and they story is okay but this is pretty typical eighties sci-fi horror. More than anything, I think they just like making exploding heads.
Super Reviewer
June 1, 2009
An inferior sequel with poor directing and un-impressive exploding heads! David Hewlett, who Stargate fans will recognise, is a pretty capable lead, there are a few effective sequences, and... erm, the music score was ok, I guess. I was more disappointed in this than your average sequel because the original film had so many unexplored threads and ideas, but sadly The New Order doesn't really offer anything fresh, and instead tries to predictably reference the original. This film seems much more of its time than Cronenberg's original, which had a futuristic feel. Tom Butler is a lousy bad guy, too.
Page 1 of 3