Critters 4

In Critters 4 Anders Hove looks slightly better than his turn in Subspecies, but he looks like he's doing a straight mimic of Brad Dourif's greasy gross look from Graveyard Shift. And with a single sentence I suddenly realize why no one wants to talk film with me.

Brain-numbingly slow, with rage-inducing superflous scenes and shots. There's no good reason for it to exist, apart from the obviou$. In fact, watching this abomination should be made illegal, as there's a serious haphazard of death by boredom. It actually gave my one friend a fever and put another in the foetal position. And who the hell let the writer of part 3 direct?! Incredibly, it might be even more horrendous and inept than that God-awful piece of shit. So that would be a 'skip it', then.

It seems that the producers didn't so much have a script as a battle plan: How do we get through the next five minutes? Interestingly, I was to ask the exact same question while viewing this...

Critters... IN SPAAAAACE where no one can hear me groan in shame and pain.

The fourth movie in the "Critters" franchise is the tiresome conclusion to the "lovable" drunk-turned-hero, "Charlie". In addition, the movie is the result of the franchise's violent death throes, secreting the last drop of creativity left inside the producers to be captured on film. Producer Rupert Harvey stepped into the director's chair, and the results are this boring misshapen space western infested with "Critters", that spend most of their time trying to escape from their own movie.

GENERAL HEALTH WARNING: DO NOT WATCH ALL FOUR CRITTERS MOVIES BACK TO BACK - So, the fourth (and I pray to god the last we'll ever see) in this miserable line of creature-features manages the impressive task of sucking even more than Critters 3. Not as much a movie as a paralyzing stare down in the abyss.

Common complaints about the dearth of critter action are valid, but thanks to the efforts of a respectable cast, the film is a half decent low budget sci-fi until it seriously derails in the final reel and becomes incredibly stupid. Harvey's inexperience behind the camera is clearly evident, and his sense of pacing is off. The ropey effects seal its fate.

Obviously, this series has encountered a problem by the fourth installment, that is a problem in story, while the direction, writing and acting are watchable, there is really no serious appeal in this movie. It could have been a decent movie, but the problem is that the critters are neither as scary as they should be, nor do they have as much screen time as they should.

The worst thing in life is wasted talent, so why did the producers of the critters franchise wait till the last movie of the series to get the best cast? Brad Dourif en Angella Basset? Really? In critters 4? and the writers or director dont do them any justice. Horribly written, blandly directed,averagely acted. Such a waste! Even the effects are terrible!

The best sequel of the series! For what it's worth.

You always hope to get at least the smell of fetid desperation by the time you hit the “…in space” entry, and while this doesn’t have it in bucket loads, the odd cross-pollinating of series inspiration GREMLINS and competitor ALIEN feels like a sweaty lame duck; any suspense or horror from the Critters themselves has long evaporated, and the human characters here are dull, colourless, cookie-cutter versions of any combination of the ALIEN teams (not even Bassett can spark any life).

I wonder if someone out there was eagerly awaiting the next installment of the Critters franchise?

Why? Why drive this into the ground? This franchise has pretty much followed the Leprechaun formula, with it now being in space. Next one, the Crites will probably wind up in the Hood. If you're seeing this to resolve the cliffhanger from the third movie, you're honestly probably better off simply using your own imagination as to how would play out. Don't waste your time, because that's exactly what it will feel like you've been doing.

One of the worst films I have seen all year.

Leo Johnson in space. Gremlins/Alien hybrid without the humour or scares -lame.

Slightly better than Critters 3, but that's not really saying much.

Actually, they're invading _Alien_ territory. In the grand tradition of Billy Zane and Leonardo diCaprio once again we get an up-and-coming star in a Critters flick -- in this case, Basset -- but she acquits herself well in the cliched Sigourney Weaver tough-heroine spot. No better or worse than its immediate predecessors.

Possibly the best in the series. Normally taking a horror franchise into space is a death blow, but seeing as this one originated there it works fine. Before the Critters really arrive its just well done sci fi. lived in universe, plausable technobabble, fleshed out (to an extent) characters. They also return to the fact that the Critters are a technological and intelligent species themselves, able to work complex machines instead of just being relatively smart animals. Charlie, the series

Not very good. Not aggressively bad. It is probably the worst entry into the franchise, though, & ends things on a pretty flat note. Opper & Dourif are the best things about what's otherwise a mediocre at best sci-fi movie & a possibly below mediocre creature feature. The Critters look the worst they ever have, the few kills are pedestrian, & none of the characters- except Charlie- are fleshed out enough to care for. It also totally betrays Charlie & Ugg's friendship for no reason. Meh.

Die Hard in Space...With Critters

Pleasant surprise after Critters 3