--- title: "Highlander II: The Quickening: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/highlander-ii-the-quickening/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/highlander-ii-the-quickening" critics_score: 22 critics_reviews: 10 licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Highlander II: The Quickening (1991): what the critics said Critics' score 22 from 10 reviews: 0 positive, 1 mixed, 9 negative. The consensus on Highlander II: The Quickening is heavily negative: nine of the ten reviews reject it, with plot confusion the most persistent complaint. Praise is scarce and centres on isolated pleasures rather than the film as a whole. Variety finds that the action sequences bring it to life, while the Los Angeles Times enjoys the elaborate production design and the cast’s evident amusement. There is little agreement that these compensate for the storytelling. The main divide concerns how much enjoyment survives the muddle. The Los Angeles Times offers the sole mixed assessment, finding the sequel clearer than its predecessor and receptive to its self-mockery. Most critics instead describe an incoherent science-fiction turn that damages the original’s fantasy premise. Even the visual appeal is disputed: Time Out finds slick images but excessive effects and leaden pacing, while Collider criticises cheap-looking production and unconvincing effects. The spread is overwhelmingly towards rejection, with one comparatively forgiving response. ## Los Angeles Times — Kevin Thomas Fi1m's normalised score 60/100 (inferred from the text). 1 November 1991. The film improves on the original by clarifying some of its vagueness while joking about its own confusing premise. The critic praises the elaborate production design and the cast's evident enjoyment but notes it remains best for those unconcerned with logical coherence. [Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-11-01-ca-467-story.html) ## Variety — Variety Staff Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 31 December 1990. Audiences unfamiliar with the first film will struggle to follow the incoherent plot that jumps across time and space. The critic notes that the film comes alive in its action sequences but criticizes the overall narrative confusion. [Read the review](https://variety.com/1990/film/reviews/highlander-ii-the-quickening-1200428886/) ## Time Out Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). The sequel's slick visuals only highlight how empty the story has become. It features leaden pacing, excessive effects and a lack of imagination. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/highlander-ii-the-quickening) ## The Telegraph Fi1m's normalised score 15/100 (inferred from the text). 14 June 2026. The piece portrays Highlander II as a colossal flop and one of the worst sequels ever made, a disaster hated by critics and fans for retroactively ruining the original's lore with a botched story about immortals. It notes the film's commercial failure and production troubles while acknowledging some residual charms in the rushed final cut. [Read the review](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/2026/06/14/sean-connery-disaster-of-highlander-2/) ## Empire — Kim Newman Fi1m's normalised score 10/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 2000. The critic finds the sequel totally incoherent, with a plot that makes no sense and tired visuals from the director. They single out the confused story premises for complaint. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/highlander-ii-quickening-review/) ## RogerEbert.com — Roger Ebert Fi1m's normalised score 10/100 (inferred from the text). 1 November 1991. The critic finds the film hilariously incomprehensible and one of the worst science fiction movies ever made. He singles out its absurd plot involving immortals from the planet Zeist and a nonsensical energy shield for ridicule. [Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/highlander-2-the-quickening-1991) ## The AV Club — Tasha Robinson Fi1m's normalised score 10/100 (inferred from the text). 29 March 2006. The review lambasts the film for its terrible acting, plotting, dialogue, special effects, music, action sequences, continuity, story logic, and jokes. It discusses the troubled production history and the 'Renegade Version' DVD cut in a critical context. [Read the review](https://www.avclub.com/highlander-2-renegade-version-1798209167) ## Eye for Film — Jennie Kermode Rating 1/5. 8 July 2012. The critic finds the sequel a major disappointment, ruined by its clumsy shift into clichéd science fiction that undermines the original's fantasy. She singles out the weak script and lacklustre performances, noting that even the cast's efforts cannot salvage the film's desperation and poor execution. [Read the review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/highlander-ii-the-quickening-1991-film-review-by-jennie-kermode) ## Collider — Samuel Williamson Fi1m's normalised score 10/100 (inferred from the text). 30 November 2023. The critic portrays Highlander II as an incomprehensible disaster with a nonsensical alien-origin plot, cheap production values, and unconvincing effects that even its director wanted to disown. Mulcahy's later Renegade Cut fails to fix the fundamental mess. [Read the review](https://collider.com/highlander-2-the-quickening-director-russell-mulcahy/) ## Den of Geek — Alex Carter Fi1m's normalised score 10/100 (inferred from the text). 19 August 2014. The critic concludes that Highlander II is awful and retcons the original film disastrously. They single out the nonsensical plot involving aliens from Zeist and the director's disownment of the film. [Read the review](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/what-went-wrong-with-highlander-ii-the-quickening/) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/highlander-ii-the-quickening.md