Worst of the Worst movie reviews - Highlander 2
Every week I’ll be watching the worst rated movies on Rotten Tomatoes so you don’t have to. I’ll be doing one every week until the final issue where I’ll review the worst movie ever made (according to a random article I found). What are my qualifications you ask? I took Introduction to Media Studies in my first year and got a B average, so I think I know what I’m talking about. I’m going to watch each of these movies and decide whether it is rightfully on the worst movies of all-time list, based on my expert opinion.
This week I’ll be reviewing the 23rd worst movie ever made, according to Rotten Tomatoes. This beautiful bit of cinema is from 1991, a sequel to a film I’ve never seen. The Highlander 2: The Quickening is a sci-fi film set in 2024, AKA two years from now. I would like to reiterate that I have not seen any other films in the series, so I am straight up going in blind to this. That being said, it’s a deeply confusing movie.
They managed to score Sean Connery for this movie which is an exceptional achievement. From what I can gather from the plot, there’s an old guy who has lost his immortality (which I’m assuming he had in the first movie? I don’t know, I really should have watched the original.) The old man is played by Christopher Lambert, who is actually thirty-three at the time. Which means, in just over 10 years I will be considered old and also lose my immortality.
Basically no spoilers but he goes to a far off planet to get his immortality back. Woo hoo.
This is going to be a short review, mostly because I had no idea what was going on and I’m not going to pretend I did. BUT there were some cool fight scenes that were pretty epic for ‘91, and did I mention they bagged Sean Connery?
According to the two minutes of research I did before I watched this movie, the quality of this movie is hotly debated in the cinephile community. Some people think it’s awesome, some people think it’s dog shit. Now feels like a good time to say that I actually don’t know what makes a good movie. Normally, if a movie is good then it has to be under two hours long. Any longer and it doesn’t keep my attention. For example, Shrek 1, 2, 3 and 4 all sit around the one and a half hour mark, which means they are excellent films. Highlander 2 comes in just under the wire at one hour and 57 minutes.
Would I watch this movie if I hadn’t accidentally committed to watching a shit movie for every Massive issue this year? No, probably not. I’m rating it higher than The Disappointments Room and much, much lower than Shrek one through four.
Does it deserve to be on the worst movies list? Yes. It was confusing and also made someone that was thirty-three seem elderly, not a fan.
