I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

disgusting, overrated, pointless

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Sometimes horror movies have such bad concepts and production quality that they absolutely must be horror/comedies. The Critters franchise's concept isn't as bad as evil bongs or killer gingerbread men, just a little inferior to most. Little furry alien things arrive on earth and wreak havoc. There's alien bounty hunters that are cheesy as hell and the critters themselves are hilarious, but the first instalment of the series did not seem to think so. In a movie with such bad acting, dumb characters and poorly made monsters, they actually seemed to think it would be legitimate fright fest. Producers realized this mistake and made the other instalments embrace the hilarity it didn't seem to realize it flaunted.Critters are tiny furry aliens that are actually pretty cool looking. If all four 'Critters' movies was 100% critters and 0% everybody else, they may have actually been good.Just because 'Critters 2' takes a more comedic turn and is better than the first film, does not mean it is good. The family that got terrorized in the first is still scarred and nobody in town believes in these furry monsters. They soon believe them when even more critters than before terrorize the town.What makes this a better sequel is that there's more critters, more action, and more comedy. Usually sequels add more of what the first one had and often does not mean that its the better film. When the first instalment of a film is bad and the only cure is more, then adding more of the first is well worth it. If you have a strong sense of humour, then the 20 minutes or so of the silly looking, Jim Henson knock-off critters will provide a somewhat enjoyable time. Everything else this has sucks.

The first Critters (1986) movie was one of the best in an abundance of Gremlins rip-off's to come out following the release of Joe Dante's classic in 1984. It was amusing, entertaining, satisfyingly bloody and whizzed by in a fast-paced 90 minute running time. The titular Critters or, to give them their proper name, Crites, were also a memorable creation - tiny balls of fur with nasty teeth and the ability to shoot poisoned darts from their back. They are cuddly enough to be oddly cute but with a face only a mother could love. The surprisingly modest box-office takings established Critters as a franchise, and the sequel arrived just two years later.Unsurprisingly, Critters 2 is little more than a re-hash of the first movie, with the terrorising creatures attacking the same town again and coming up against their arch-nemesis Brad (Scott Grimes), who apparently had his ear pieced and grew a mullet between films. Brad's celebrity status in the town catches the eye of the slight- older Megan (Liane Curtis), but Brad just wants his friend Charlie (Don Keith Opper) back. Still teamed up with bounty hunter Ug (Terrence Mann) somewhere in space, Charlie's spaceship detects Crite activity back on Earth, and so they return to destroy them. Soon enough, the Crites have bred beyond count and are munching on everything in sight.The biggest disappointment with Critters 2 is the sheer lack of imagination. The first movie had enough wit and self-awareness to create something bolder, the like of which was done in Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990) and its bat-s**t crazy, anything-goes climax. The creatures too, are easily propped behind a variety of counters so their puppeteers can operate them with ease, while the first movie at least demonstrated some creative puppet work. The humour is goofier and more obvious, and the climactic set-piece involving a giant ball of combined critters attacking a garage packed with fast- food, just fails to hit the mark. It's certainly an easy watch, but there's little here to excite.

Now today I'm just going to talk about how good or bad this movie is. Im not going to review it because everyone dosn't wont 44 people telling what this movie is about. So lets get into it straight away. Now I k Bnow everyones being saying this but Critters 2 is not as good as the first and that is a fact. And instead of the Critters being serious in the first one they be silly in this movie and continue it in 3 and 4. But that dosn't mean its bad in fact this movie is awesome and I like it! In this movie it stars some of the main characters from the first one like Charlie played by Don Opper, Ug played by Terrence Mann, Brad played by Scott Grimes, Sally played by Lin Shaye and they do have Harv in this movie but played by a different actor Barry Corbin. They have some new characters in this movie like Megan played by Liane Curtis, Mr. Morgan played by Sam Anderson, Wesley played by Tom Hodges and Quigly played by Douglas Rowe. So thank you for reading my review and I will review Critters and 3 and 4.

I loved "Critters",but this sequel wasn't quite that good.The premise had some potential,some Critters eggs were left behind on planet earth and the Bounty Hunters have to return so they can exterminate the furry menace once and for all.Meanwhile it's easter season and Brad Brown is back in town.Now i'm sure you can imagine what happens when you mix Critters eggs and Ester time right?Well...it could have been so much more....Anyway the acting wasn't fantastic,in fact it was quite bad sometimes..the cheesy 80's special effects and rubber dummies are there and they do the job if you like the style (like I do).There is a little bit of gore but nothing special..The humor was dull with some exceptions, like the new Bounty Hunter looking for a identity, the car chasing and the Critters assemble (I loved the fx here...maybe the only original idea) were funny too...but in the end i couldn't help but feel a little bored through the whole movie.I give it 4,5 out of 10.