Now some movies are classics. Some disasters. And then you’ve got movies like Second Sight, where half the fun is just trying to figure out how they thought the ingredients looked so good before they got thrown in the oven.
You’ve got John Larroquette, who at this point was already killing it on Night Court. You’ve got Bronson Pinchot, who was another of the big sitcom faces of the era thanks to Perfect Strangers. And somebody looked at that combination and said, “You know what people need? A supernatural detective comedy with these two running around Boston delivering hijinks.” And honestly… I get it. That’s exactly the kind of pitch that would’ve gotten my attention on a rental shelf, and it did when I was a kid. Big title, recognizable faces, a weird concept, and just enough confidence to make you think will be one of those strange little hidden gems nobody talks about anymore. Instead, what you get is something much messier than that. But also, in its own way, kind of more fun as a result. So today, we’re talking about a movie that absolutely belongs in the Rental Rack Rejects section, it’s “Second Sight” from 1989.
What’s up out there guys. Welcome back to Sunset Video. Where the open sign’s always glowing, the “staff picks” wall is always stocked, and the conversation at the counter is the best part of the journey. This is “Rental Rack Rejects”, the series where we talk about the blatantly bad movies that we still can’t help having a soft spot for. Well except for the few of you who will let me know in the comments that these movies deserve to be forgotten. These are the weird ones, the sloppy ones, the bargain-bin beauties, the movies that may not fully work, but still leave behind just enough charm, chaos, or late-night cable energy to stay stuck in my head. So, with that said, let’s get into the comedic chaos of “Second Sight.”
Box Art Bait
Now something all movies certified for Rental Rack Reject status have in common is their “Box Art Bait.” And this movie really does have it. “Second Sight” is a strong title. It sounds slick. It sounds mysterious. It sounds like maybe you’re about to get some cool little paranormal mystery or a supernatural comedy with a fun gimmick. Then you see the cast: John Larroquette, Bronson Pinchot, Bess Armstrong, Stuart Pankin. Which is a lineup built to make you stop and think, “Alright… this could be something.”
And the setup is honestly not too bad either. Larroquette plays Wilber Wills, a private detective. Pinchot plays Bobby McGee, his psychic partner. And together, they get wrapped up in a kidnapping case involving a Catholic cardinal. So, in retrospect it’s a purely specific, goofy, late-80s studio-comedy premise that you almost want it to work on principle alone. And really, that’s what sells it. Not just the absurd premise, but the pairing. Because Larroquette and Pinchot were coming in with two completely different sitcom flavors. Larroquette brought that dry, smart, slightly exasperated rhythm he thrived with. Pinchot delivered the full-throttle elastic chaos that warmed audiences’ hearts every Friday night. So right away, the movie promises a clash of styles that feels like it should create some real comic sparks. And that is the bait.
The Big Idea
Then we get to “The Big Idea.” And this is where I actually think the movie is onto something. Now the central concept is solid enough. Odd-couple detective team, one guy is grounded, the other guy is psychic, throw them into a kidnapping case, mix in some supernatural weirdness, some city chaos, and let the cast do the rest. That could absolutely work.
And the reason it feels like it could work is because of Larroquette and Pinchot. Larroquette is the kind of actor who can anchor broad comedy without looking like he’s trying too hard. That was part of what made him so effective on “Night Court.” He could play smug, frustrated, irritated, amused, all at once. Pinchot, meanwhile, had already built a whole TV identity around big character comedy and full-body eccentricity on “Perfect Strangers.” So, the idea of putting those two energies together is actually kind of smart.
Now the movie’s real problem is that it never quite figures out how to balance them. It knows the pairing is the engine, but it doesn’t always know what road to put that engine on. Is this a buddy comedy? A paranormal farce? A weird detective movie? A chase movie? A cartoon with real people in it? The answer is mostly yes to all of these, in segments. And that’s where the wobbling starts.
The Wreckage
Now we get to “The Wreckage.” And this is where the movie really earns its spot in the reject pile. Because despite its questionable charms, “Second Sight” is an undeniable mess.
The tone is all over the place. The pacing is strange. Scenes don’t really build from one to the next so much as tumble into one another for 83 minutes. The whole thing has that familiar rental-rack feeling where the movie keeps moving because it knows if it slows down, you might start asking questions nobody on set wanted brought up. But the most fascinating part of the wreckage is the Larroquette-Pinchot contrast. Because Larroquette feels like he’s trying to play a movie star version of “the normal guy in an abnormal situation.” He’s trying to keep the thing tethered. He gives the movie a center of gravity. You can feel him working to make the premise play. And in a weird way, he almost approaches it like he’s in a more traditional studio comedy.
Pinchot, on the other hand, is doing something else entirely. He’s not just turned up. He’s turned inside out. And I say that affectionately, because he’s a huge part of why the movie is memorable at all. But he’s operating on such a different comic wavelength that the movie starts to feel like two competing sitcom energies got trapped in the same feature film. Larroquette is trying to steer. Pinchot is hanging out the passenger-side window yelling at the paranormal. All while Stuart Pankin and Bess Armstrong attempt to shoehorn in a small resemblance of normalcy. And honestly, that clash kind of becomes the movie. You can almost imagine a better version of this where Larroquette’s dry delivery and Pinchot’s hyperactive weirdness lock together perfectly.
Instead, they kind of scrape against each other. Sometimes it’s funny. Sometimes it’s exhausting. And sometimes it feels like the whole movie is being pulled in opposite directions by two very talented comedic stars doing two very different things. So, that is the wreckage.
The Charm
Then we get to “The Charm.” Because for all the movie’s problems, this Larroquette/Pinchot pairing is also the reason it still has some life all these years later. Larroquette gives the movie a baseline of professionalism and comic rhythm. Even when the material is all over the place, he at least makes it feel like somebody showed up with a game plan. There was just something very watchable about him in this era too. He had that mix of confidence, dryness, and low-key irritation that worked so well on TV, and here it gives the film a little structure whenever things start floating away.
And then Pinchot brings the exact opposite energy, which, to be fair, is part of the attraction in a movie like this. Because this isn’t a story about polished winners. This is about lovable odd couple wreckage. And Pinchot brings wreckage. Big, loud, oddly committed wreckage. He attacks the role with the kind of enthusiasm that either sinks the movie or keeps it from becoming forgettable. And in this case, maybe a little of both. And honestly, I kind of love that. Because if Larroquette is the guy trying to keep the party in order, Pinchot is the reason the party is memorable in the first place. And that combination may not make for a “good” movie, but it definitely gives “Second Sight” a personality. And for a pure rental-rack oddity, personality can and will go a long way.
Cult Residue
Then there’s Cult Residue. Now, “Second Sight” was not a hit. In fact, it was a critical and financial failure to no surprise. And almost instantly forgotten. Now there was no budget listing for this one that I could track down, however if you consider Lorimar’s common shooting budgets for mid-tier studio comedies during this time you could assume it was somewhere in the $8-12M range. It would open in early November of 1989, taking the 5th spot with a $2.2M weekend. And only get a two-week theatrical window topping out at $5.4M. So not stellar numbers at all.
Critically to no surprise reviews landed mostly on the negative side. Janet Maslin in her write up with The New York Times called Zwick’s direction “maladroit” meaning ineffective, clumsy, or bungling. So, she’s basically trying to say the film tripped over itself but wanting to say with the appearance of wearing a monocle and snacking on fine caviar. With a more community college vibe, Hal Hinson over at The Washington Post took aim at the broadness and the bargain-basement feel which makes more sense.
Regardless, this is exactly the kind of movie that can still linger in memory banks anyway. Not because it secretly worked. Not because it was misunderstood genius. But because it had recognizable faces, a weird premise, and just enough late-80s studio comedy energy to make people remember something about it.
Maybe they remember Larroquette from “Night Court” and seeing him in an odd little movie that never gets mentioned with his other notable big screen comedies. Maybe they remember Pinchot and think, “wait, what was that weird comedy he did where his body swung around on his toes?” Or maybe they just remember the title and the vague sense that this movie was on cable at some strange hour once upon a time. And to me that kind of half-memory is really its own form of VHS era afterlife. And honestly, for a movie like Second Sight, that certainly counts. Before we hand down the final reject status, here’s the quickest way to size up why “Second Sight” both works and doesn’t work at the same time.
It’s great rental-shelf bait: the title, cast, and paranormal detective premise are exactly the kind of combo that makes you stop and think this could be a hidden cable-era gem. Larroquette gives it structure: his dry, grounded comic rhythm keeps the movie from completely floating off into ultra-nonsense. Pinchot makes it memorable: even when he’s operating on a totally different wavelength, his full-tilt weirdness gives the movie personality. It also has genuine late-80s oddball charm: as a sloppy studio curiosity, it leaves behind the exact kind of VHS-era residue this series was built for.
On the other hand, the tone is all over the place: it never fully decides whether it wants to be a buddy comedy, paranormal farce, detective movie, or live-action cartoon. The pacing is clumsy: scenes feel like they tumble into each other instead of building momentum. The premise is better than the execution: the core idea is solid, but the movie never finds the sharpest version of it. And the lead dynamic is uneven: Larroquette and Pinchot are interesting together but often feel like they’re performing in two different movies.
Reject Status
So that brings us to “Second Sights” Reject Status. Is Second Sight a good movie? No. Not really. Does it waste a pretty fun concept? A little bit, yeah. Does it fully know how to use two major sitcom personalities at the height of their TV fame? Definitely not.
But is there still something fun about watching John Larroquette try to hold the center while Bronson Pinchot turns the whole movie into a psychic riot? Absolutely. So for me, Second Sight earns “VHS Fever Dream” reject status. Because this is the kind of movie you rented for the cast, kept watching for the chaos, and remember years later mostly as a very strange collision of late-80s TV energy on the big screen. And honestly, that’s plenty enough to earn a permanent place in the Rental Rack Rejects section of Sunset Video.
Anthony J. Digioia II © 2026 SilverScreen Analysis & Sunset Video Rentals
