WATCHERS (1988)

PLOT

A genetically engineered dog escapes from a research laboratory and into the arms of Corey Haim, before their relationship can get disney-esque it is interrupted by a mutated Orangutan hot on the doggy's trail

REVIEW

As a dog lover my heart warms just a tiny bit at the sight of a canine protagonist on film

Who can forget the infernal cuteness of DEVIL DOG: HOUND FROM HELL, the brave “Thor” in the werewolf flick BAD MOON, the poor shot-gun blasted seeing-eye dog in THE TOXIC AVENGER, the homeless guy's dog from AMERICAN PSYCHO that gets stomped to death by Batman, the possessed hairball from DEMONI 2, Petey from MONSTER SQUAD, the acid-pissing Rottweiler from MAN'S BEST FRIEND, whether hero, companion, victim, or threat, there has 'been a fair share of canines in Horror flicks and I've loved them all

Standing head and shoulders on top of all of them is “Furface”

Furface is a super-intelligent experiment who amidst a burning blaze flees from his lab confinement and runs away into the dark of the forest. Chasing after him is another genetic creation from the lab codenamed OXCOM, a bestial hairy ape that exists only to kill him as his designated prey, hauling his monkey-ass into the woods in pursuit of Furface. Through his escape, Furface seeks shelter in the back of a truck, momentarily discovered by Travis (Corey Haim), who while hesitant at first quickly realizes that the dog is very very VERY smart, and he decides to keep him

OXCOM is not far behind, rendering people into mince meat while searching for Furface, starting with the father of Travis' girlfriend. As the police investigate the scene the next day, Agent Johnson (played by the badass Michael Ironside) barges in on his own search for both Furface and OXCOM, letting nothing get in his way including nosy cops and uncooperative partners

WATCHERS is based on the novel by Dean Koontz, which I have never read, but from online opinion it seems this film is far from a perfect adaptation. Based on the movie's quality I could understand some of the flack, this is a somewhat bland film that doesn't really raise an eyebrow once and is quite uninspired. The book clocks in at 400+ pages and watching the flick you don't get any impression that they got the most out of it while adapting it. I'm quite sure there were many prime-cuts trimmed in translation as there were ample opportunities in character development and so forth that never came to pass

This lazy approach hurt the movie, it's clear the intention was to just make it monster-driven, there was fertile ground for many avenues to pass through but none were ever seriously considered. The buddy dynamic between Travis and Furface should have 'been groomed to the point where you felt they were to be inseparable, they emote some affection for each other but not enough, least not on the human side. If I came across a super-smart dog that could do my homework as opposed to eating it I'd be overjoyed and not constantly bewildered 

The only recognizable actors in the movie are Corey Haim, half of the Two Coreys, and the great Michael Ironside, who unfortunately does not explode any heads in this film and it probably would have helped if he did. Corey Haim does okay, rather unimpressive, can't really deduce if it's his acting ability or just the way the part was written. Michael Ironside is well, Michael Ironside, his role is totally what you'd expect from him.  Speaking of which...

The biggest gripe for me would be a spoilery-tidbit that I refuse to reveal, but the revelation at the end did jackshit for the movie. It was completely worthless as it just happened and nothing came of it, the story wasn't impacted in any way nor did it matter one bit. A minute later it was irrelevant and it was another wasted opportunity that fleshed out well could have 'been interesting but just tanked

Is this a bad film? I would say no, it isn't terrible, it wasn't the least bit excruciating watching it, and to be frank, I did enjoy it, not tremendously but I still found it okay. I'll be generous and call it a mediocre film, there's not a lot going for it, but there's also a few worthwhile things about it. As soon as nostalgia kicks in you find yourself actually enjoying it, and if you love dogs it'll multiply it's chances, watching Furface type on a computer with a pencil in his mouth will make you gaze with endearment at his doggy prowess 

WATCHERS was followed by an astonishing 3 sequels, how anyone thought rehashing this plot would be a good idea escapes me. WATCHERS II starred Marc Singer, star of V, including the tv series where his co-star was Michael Ironside. Apparently parts I and II were released on dvd together, presumably out of print, which I can understand seeing how this ain't the kind of movie you die to own for home viewing

But, like I said, it's not entirely forgetful, it drowns in a sea of superior flicks but in the right mood, it's tolerable

THE GOOD

.Furface – The star of the movie for sure, well-played by “Lala”, you genuinely feel emotionally invested in his survival

.Not seeing much of OXCOM – It's more fun to imagine what is implied and can't see, I thought it was smart to not show OXCOM in full detail until the very end of the film. I also thought he/she/it resembled the chinese wildman from BIG TROUBLE IN LITTLE CHINA

.Michael Ironside – nuff said

.Jason Priestly falling down a hill – got off easy though

THE BAD

.The blonde kid's 80's poodle mullet – OXCOM must have surely tried to have intercourse with it

.Weak characters – Aside from the dog you don't really find anyone to be anything other than predictable and cliché

.Tad bit more gore – I know I just said a less-is-more approach works much better but the gorehound in me wanted a little more in the instances where it was there, for an R rating it was kinda weak

THE FINAL CURTAIN

Okay movie, not a surefire recommendation, but an okay netflix find

RATING 6