Watchers

1988 "It started as a secret experiment... It ended up as a new breed of terror."
5.4| 1h31m| R| en
Details

A boy takes in a stray dog, later finding out that its an ultra-intelligent runaway from a genetic research lab. Unbeknownst to him, the dog is being stalked by another escaped creature thats not quite so friendly.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.
Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.
Geraldine The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.
Haven Kaycee It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film
SnoopyStyle There is an explosion in a classified research laboratory. Lem (Michael Ironside) is called in to clean up the mess. A super smart dog escapes followed by an OXCOM (Outside Experimental Combat Mammal). The OXCOM is linked to the dog killing anyone in its way. Travis Cornell (Corey Haim) is sneaking around with Tracey. They are almost caught by Tracey's dad so Travis leaves. The dog sneaks into Tracey's barn. The OXCOM attacks Tracey and kills her father. Then the dog hitches a ride from Travis. Sheriff Gaines thinks it's a bear but Deputy Porter thinks it's Sasquatch. Lem takes over the case waving his NSO credentials.The clueless parent is one of my least favorite cinematic tropes. The mom is literally talking to a dog and she stubbornly refuses to accept it. Barbara Williams does her best especially later on. It's not the worst thing in the world but this movie has so little going for it. Corey Haim has always been a better nerd struggling to get the hot girl's attention. There is something lost when he starts off with the hot girl. The special effects are pretty tame and a bit lame. The bloody violence looks cheesy with the creature mostly off screen. Again it's not the worst but the film doesn't have the skills to make lemonade out of lemons. There are no Steven Spielberg and John Williams when the shark isn't working. It is fascinating to see a young Jason Priestley. With Lem hiding Tracey, it seems obvious that Travis should contact the doctors or the cops. There are massacres but these two NSO agents continue to dominate. Even if the movie forces the conspiracy to continue, the whole area should be saturated with cops or military or both. The final twist isn't much of a surprise and comes off again rather cheesy.
lost-in-limbo Preposterous, but quite a fun gory and relentless late 80s creature-feature, where the screenplay is loosely adapted off a Dean R Koontz's novel. Instead it turns out to be a horror vehicle for teen heart throb Corey Haim, especially the amount of the time his character has and it becomes somewhat of an annoying distraction. Along for the carnage is Michael Ironside, providing plenty of ticker to his villainous ham portrayal of a devious government agent. Also the cast features good showings by Barbara Williams, Duncan Frazer, Colleen Winton, Blu Mankuma, Dan Wilson and a minor part for a young Jason Priestly. The plot has an intriguing back-story (a canine experiment gone wrong), but simply it gets lost in its cheesy dialogues and fashionable need to have a healthy body count leaving it to be a generic monster on the loose threat on a small town community. So you just take it for face value. Sometimes its hard to keep a straight face, make light of its choppy attack scenes and certain plot devices are vaguely penned, but it's commendably directed in its systematic patterns that you just go along with its genetic madness. The costume of the creature is downright tacky (a mutated ape?), but for the majority of the running time we only get jumpy glimpses of it… be it the hands, legs and then of course there's monster POV shot and growling."We're in this together."
Coventry I'm often very glad that I'm not much of a reader. Quite often when I encounter a movie-adaptation of a (famous) novel, there are always hundreds of people complaining about how awful the movie version was in comparison to the book. Well, I've never – and probably will never – read the book, so at least I don't have to feel ashamed about tremendously liking the film! It's like I don't know any better, you dig? This is also the case with "Watchers", for example. Allegedly, the Dean Koontz novel differs enormously from the 80's horror film version, with characters and story lines altered left and right in favor to appeal more to contemporary horror loving audiences. Travis, the lead character, is originally a 40-year-old social outcast in the book, whereas he's a poignant 16-year-old rebel kid in the film, portrayed by Corey Haim who was quite big at the time thanks to the success of "The Lost Boys", "Lucas" and "Silver Bullet". That's the 80's horror film industry for you. Can you blame them? Either way, "Watchers" is a shamelessly entertaining and virulent late 80's creature-feature with a pleasingly high body count, gruesome special effects, an irresistible charming 80's setting and ambiance, cool acting performances and one of the best use of an intelligent dog in a film ever. Travis Cornell lives, with his yummy mother, nearby a research facility where the government – in all secrecy of course – works on the ultimate warfare weapon. The weapon itself is a giant and nearly indestructible Bigfoot creature, but the breakthrough is that it is telepathically linked to a intelligent dog. The monster is programmed to track the animal down and kill everything on its path in between. The dog and the monster escape from the lab just before there's an explosion. The dog hitches a ride in Travis' truck and he decides to keep the animal when he notices its abnormally high intellect. The dog can type warnings on a computer and compose messages via a game of scrabble, for crying out loud! Meanwhile, the Oxcom monster leaves a trail of blood and mayhem throughout the area, and if that isn't worse enough yet, there's also the relentless government agent Michael Ironside. He's after Travis and his dog to cover up the failures. "Watchers" is fast-paced and exciting, with massacres that are delightfully gruesome. The Oxcom monster has the nasty habit of removing people's eyeballs, which leads to a handful of grisly images and eerie make-up effects. The acting performances are great. Barbara Williams is excellent as Travis' caring mother and Michael Ironside behaves psychopathic and nightmarish as always. Corey Haim uses his typical 'rebellious 80's teenager' charisma to maximum results and the dog – Fur Face – is genius. Oh, "Watchers" also provides the opportunity to admire hunky boy Jason Priestley and watch him get slaughtered by Bigfoot before he became world famous as Brandon Walsh in "Beverly Hills 90210". Splendid 80's nostalgia!
udar55 This failed adaptation of the Dean Koontz novel about a man befriending a super smart dog. Why do I say failed? Because they took the book's thirtysomething ex-Delta Force lead and made him Corey Haim. Yes, Corey Freakin' Haim. I'm sure Dean Koontz started rolling before he even gets close to being in a grave. Even sadder, the dog co-star acts circles around Haim. Seriously. Director Jon Hess makes a fine looking film (shot in British Columbia) and stages some nice attack sequences with some decent gore. But the monster design, something instrumental to these kind of flicks, is downright sad. Not as sad as Feldman, er, Haim being the lead, but sad enough that they have to keep it hidden in tight close ups or shadows. The always reliable Michael Ironside also gives a nice performance as the Government agent tracking the dog. Look for Jason Priestly as "Boy on bike" who gets offed.Corman made sure to get his money's worth out of his license of Koontz's novel as he made three sequels to this; they all basically remake the film with the second one being closer to the book than this one. As I said about RAWHEAD REX somewhere in this thread, I'm not a proponent of remakes but this is definitely a case where some filmmakers could make a movie 100% better from the source material.