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

Stephan Hammond It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Yash Wade Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

Edwin The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Eric Stevenson People who haven't seen "Scanners" are only familiar with the scene where the one guy's head explodes. That's really it. Judging from that, you'd think it would be a movie with a lot of explosions and killing. Okay, there is some of that near the end. I admit some of the acting could be better. I still praise this film for being so real. Yeah, not easy for a film about psychic powers to be. I really appreciate the dialogue and how everyone works together. The best part is probably the main twist or twists near the end. We even get a nice credit sequence that represents the rest of the film. While not one of my favorites, it's certainly watchable. I had no idea this was Canadian. ***

trishaade I watched this movie for the first time recently - I missed it when it was first released. I really liked some of David Cronenberg's other movies (THE BROOD) and have found some of them quite disturbing (VIDEODROME). I'd also seen, on numerous occasions, the quite iconic scene towards the beginning of the movie.The film is about corporation where one of their divisions has been doing specialized research on people with psychic powers, called scanners. One scanner has gone rogue and has recruited other scanners to join him so that they can win world denomination. The corporation pits one of their scanners against the rogue with the hopes he will be destroyed. I had very high expectations for the film, and was somewhat disappointed. It's not that the movie is bad, per se, its more that it is miscast in parts, doesn't make much sense and has a tendency to move on the slower side. There are parts of the film that just drag on and on, especially through the middle. I feel that the lead didn't have enough of a dynamic personality to own the role and I had some difficulty finding him believable. Whether this is the fault of the actor or his voice, the director or the casting people (or a mixture of all of them) is anyone's guess. I believe that if the lead had been given to someone who was less subdued, the movie would have been much better. There is also a right place, right time kind of thing going on throughout that didn't make much sense. Additionally, some of the situations the scanner "employed" by the corporation, who was once homeless, finds himself in and is able to master without previous knowledge left me shaking my head. It was all a bit much.On the plus side, there were some nice special effects and almost every one other than the lead did a fairly good job with their roles. There are some nice twists and turns towards the end that I didn't see coming. The soundtrack is effective.This film generally has pretty good reviews overall, so if you are a fan of sci-fi or Mr. Cronenberg, give it a watch if you want. Horror fans may like it too, but again, it didn't float my boat as much as some other viewers.

sol- Fresh as ever after five viewings, 'Scanners' is more than just a film about telepathy, telekinesis and exploding heads. The film takes a philosophical look at what telepathy could by definition mean; in the words of Patrick McGoohan's character, "the direct linking of two nervous systems", which is not just limited to human beings but also connecting to computers (machines). Indeed, as hard as it for a so-called scanner to "develop a self-personality" amid hearing so many voices from others, the movie begs the question of whether or not these mutant human beings are a superior evolutionary form. Add in brooding Howard Shore music, awesome sound effects (for all the overlapping voices), chilling dissolve edits and a curious colour red motif, and 'Scanners' is a typically atmospheric David Cronenberg ride. At times, the film has the feeling of a generic 'trust no one' thriller, but for the most part, it is a gripping ride with an excellent art therapy subplot - which could be interpreted as Cronenberg offering a commentary on himself and why he makes films (much could also be said of one character designing a giant human head to sit inside. On top of all this, the iconic special effects and action scenes still stack up well more than thirty years later thanks to detailed makeup work, particularly as the veins of those being scanned slowly rise to the surface.

qmtv It's got atmosphere, but lost potential, good ideas, fx are good, but one of the worst actor ever.I saw this movie in the theaters back in 1981. It has one of the best near open scenes with the head exploding and a very good ending with the dueling scanners. It's got great atmosphere. Decent music. Very good acting from the doctor/father and the bad scanner.Here's the big problem. 1) The good scanner is one of the worst and most monotone actors on the planet. I'll give him an "A" for showing up to work, but this man cannot act. 2) The middle section is very slow. 3) Obvious problems, like in the opening scene with the head exploding, the wide shot shows no body or blood on the table. The van scene is shot like crap, it's moving so slow. 4) The cinematography is crap, just basic shots, like no thoughts went into it. 5) The dialogue was crap. Towards the end when the doctor sat down thinking just before he got shot was interesting, but it didn't work. 6) The female lead was introduced very late in the movie and she did very little and her acting was OK, but not great.The beginning and ending makes this movie. It is a missed opportunity. It needed more work. Very unfortunate. My rating is B-, or 6. I will give it a 7 because of the beginning and ending.