Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Blogs | Writers | Paid | My Orble | Login
 
Picking the rare gems out of a sea of crap.... so you don't have to!
Part 2 of the Sci-Fi Channel Crock of Shit Double Feature Extravaganza!



Premise: A group of voracious snakehead fish decimate the fish population of a lake before the lake is poisoned, supposedly killing them off. A few years later, the snakeheads are back, only this time they're huge, and start eating everyone. Oh and they can walk on land. Oh, and one of them is the size of a whale. Yeah, it's that kind of movie.


This, alone, couldn't have killed 'Sy-Fi' (that will now on be referred to as Sci-Fi, because the whole rebranding is mind-numbingly stupid) for me. I have fond memories of the channel... going over to a friends house who had cable and catching the latest Battlestar Gallactica episodes (which is quite possibly the best sci-fi series ever, right up alongside Firefly, Stargate SG-1 and even The X-Files. And a ways back I reviewed Altered, which I thoroughly enjoyed.

Unfortunately, it seems that the fun ended along with Battlestar. I've seen a number of Sci-Fi channel movies in the recent past, and they have pretty much been the same story over and over again, with a little twist in each one. Start with a flashback to the beginnings/Last attack of (insert bad-guy here). Introduce supporting character, who knows details of the plot, usually someone knowledgeable in the field of (bad-guy). Often Supporting Character is related to one member of the main duo, be it as father/brother/friend/etc. Then introduce hapless victims, mixed gender, usually teenagers. They come across some evidence of (bad guy), but don't realize exactly what is happening. Main duo (guy/girl) will get some indication of what's going on, and while they are investigating it their friends will start dying. They realize, and start trying to stop (bad guy). They come up with a plan; which subsequently fails. Supporting character will then sacrifice themselves to stop/slow down (Bad Guy), allowing main duo to finish the job, and live happily ever after.... until there is some invariably stupid twist allowing Bad Guy/Spawn of Bad Guy to survive and star in the sequels!


There are some small variations. Supporting Character doesn't always die, and on rare occasions there isn't a twist. Oh, an interesting fact for y'all, the name of Bad Guy, More often than not, the name of Bad Guy can be found in the title. Locusts had locusts, Snakehead has the snakeheads, Pumpkinhead has... well, you get the idea.

Plot: About as hole-y as you would expect from a movie of this title. I'm only going to point out some choice plot holes, as describing all of them would ruin the movie for you... ha. Lets start with the snakeheads. They can walk on land, but who am I to say that the fish can't do that. They grow to enormous size... because someone is dumping human growth hormone in the lake. Like I mentioned, one is whale sized... because a lake would totally have enough food for an animal to reach that size.... other than that, totally plausible, although surprisingly none of the others seem to be longer than 10 feet.

Next... SPOILER!... well, sort of, this movie really sort of spoils itself.

They kill the snakeheads by electrocuting the lake. They cut a power line that's feeding a town, and drop it into a lake. It then sends an electric pulse through the lake, killing all the snakeheads. Mightily convenient that all the fish happened to be in the lake, seeing as they had been roaming around the land right up until then. I'm no physicist, but wouldn't a power line dropped in a lake do very little? It's a lot of water....

What's that, I hear you cry? Horror movies require a little suspension of belief? It would appear in the act of being suspended, belief got tangled up and hung itself.

The acting is terrible. Nothing worth mentioning.

The effects are typical sci-fi... better than some, but pretty terrible. I laughed at them.

Gore is pretty tame. Again, nothing worth mentioning.

Overall... Avoid it. Please, for the love of god, avoid it. I have lost all hope of seeing anything resembling quality being produced by Sci-Fi, and the dumb-ass rebranding just makes it that much easier... Sci-Fi holds some fond memories for me... Sy-Fy can suck my nuts.

64
Vote
   




Part 1 of the Sci-Fi Crock-Of-Shit Double Whammy!

Premise: A company genetically engineers locusts that are carnivores, trying to make them eat bugs off crops as an alternative to pesticides. Predictably, they escape captivity, and start eating people.

First up, sorry for the hiatus. I have been having some internet issues, but the reviewing machine that is Evil Pleasures is in full swing. I have a fresh batch of godawful movies for your twisted entertainment, beginning with some trash offerings from the Sci-Fi channel.

I blame my tolerance of Sci-Fi on Altered (Which I review here). Altered was a decent flick... however, Locusts is not, for a number of reasons.

The acting ranges from wooden to terrible, without a single decent performance over the whole movie. I really, honestly wanted the locusts just to eat everyone after the first 5 minutes so that the movie could be over and done with... but they managed to drag it out for another hour and a half, much to my dismay.

Likewise, the script is terrible. The dialogue is horrible, and combined with the horrible delivery is in some scenes laughable. The writer also wasn't bothered with that whole 'plausibility' thing, so they didn't bother to include it. For example, the locusts are attracted to pesticide, and only kill people because of the residual pesticide in their bodies (I know, right?). Also, the locusts seem to have this magical ability to fly straight through people... some of the silliest scenes in the movie are seeing a person get hit by a locust and having the bug explode out of their back. Also, from what I know about locusts, they eat everything and leave nothing behind. Well not these locusts, oh no! For some reason they like leaving behind half-eaten corpses.... for no reason at all. Oh, and my personal favourite: The locust swarm is comprised entirely of drones, which cannot breed. However, the swarm somehow manages to breed... somehow, which is never explained. It's these kind of stupid plot holes that are the result of nothing more than lazy writing that really ruin the movie, although there wasn't alot there to ruin...

In what seems to be a running thing with Sci-Fi Channel movies, the effects are almost all CGI, and terrible. Totally unconvincing. There are a few crappy bug props, but these too are just... well... crappy.

I think the problem here stems from the fact that Sci-Fi is, after all, a TV network. They make shows for TV, and I am renting/buying expecting something more. Locusts is mindless entertainment, exactly what you would expect to see on TV, with little thought or effort put into making quality cinema. Sci-Fi has adopted the quantity over quality approach, convinced that their audience would rather see endless crappy movies rather than repeats of fewer quality movies. While this may work on TV... it doesn't for stand-alone movies.

Take HBO, for instance. They make quality shows, but repeat them all the damn time. Back when I had cable, you could easily see the same movie 7 or 8 times in a week.

Overall... possibly worth watching if you are stuck at home on a rainy day with absolutely nothing else to do. Other than that, ignore it.
64
Vote
   


Dying God

June 2nd 2009 14:27


Premise: Some kind of god/demon-type creature is dying, and for some reason this makes it necessary to rape anything that comes nearby. Not in a figurative sense, literally. Because, you know, what better than a little cancer to bring out the nympho in you.

Anyways, James Horan plays a corrupt cop who ends up confronting the creature.


Now, I thought this movie had a lot of potential because, and I mean seriously, how creepy is the idea of a rape monster. Horror fans have been desensitized alot of late. The rending of flesh and bone is now common fare, and sins of a more carnal nature are almost required inputs into alot of the trash that comes out of Hollywood. However, rape is still that sensitive little area that few have dared to venture into. Scenes of rape are striking, shocking, appalling, all of the things you associate with good horror, so the idea of a rape-monster makes my horror-senses tingle.

That feeling, unfortunately, quickly turned to nausea. That I had any expectations at all of this movie is a testament to the sheer possibilities offered by a rape monster. I can't help but think of the possible outcome had a competent team been behind this project. However, these musings are relegated to the realm of conjecture: Dying God is total garbage. 100% unforgivable. Even worse, considering how good it could have been.

I don't have the patience to go through everything that's wrong with this movie, so I'll stick to the main points.

Firstly: The script. You know how some scripts start out well enough, but then quickly turn to absurd or corny... well, Dying God's starts bad, gets worse, and then (just to be different) stays awful. The movie starts with a young indian boy being hunted by white guys with guns... for absolutely no reason. The kid is in the movie, sure, but that scene had nothing to do with the movie at all. Apparently the monster's huge penis rips a hole in women, except for fertile women. Because, you know, fertile women (just like Wolverine) have adamantium-plated vaginas. Oh yeah, and the monster is strong enough to (unconvincingly) swipe a guys head off in one hit, but can't overpower James Horan? Literally, they have a struggling match, and the cop wins. Over the creature. How incredibly lame is that? Or my personal favourite... the cops see the creature giving a forced abortion to a pregnant lady (by tearing the baby out)... they then shoot the creature, and (for no reason at all) take out the baby. A social critique of police brutality? I highly doubt it.

Nest: The acting. On this note, WHY LANCE HENRIKSEN, WHY MUST YOU FOOL ME SO!?

Yes, Ed Harly, my main man Bishop himself... and Lance is always fine to watch. Lance Henrisksen is the sole reason I watched this movie. I figured it couldn't be that bad if he was in it, right?

Well, fuck you Lance Henriksen, fuck you right in the eye.

Mr. Henriksen led me astray. Although, as always, I cannot fault him... the rest of the cast should be ashamed of themselves. Every other character is, without fail, unconvincing. Well, ok, there is one relatively attractive girl who's ok, but she's a mute so that goes without saying. Worst among them is Horan, who tries, and fails. Coupling Horan and this script is like seeing an unstoppable force of failure meeting an immovable object of crappiness... truly a spectacle to behold.

Discussing these points in detail is making me angry, so i'll just skim over the rest.

The film quality? Appaling. I wouldn't be surprised if it was shot on a digi-cam. Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure it was.

Nudity? For a movie about a rape-monster, next to none. Maybe one boob in there somewhere. Disappointing to say the least.

Fear? 0.

Creature effects: Woefully bad. After seeing the monster, my first thoughts should have been 'oh FUCK' or 'jesus, what is that?'. Instead, I got 'Wow. They really want us to believe that's a monster?'. I think that sums it up.

Shock value? 0. Tries to pass off holding a handful of raw meat as gore effects. Maybe one exploding head, and one exploding baby. Not very impressive. Especially disappointing given the taboo surrounding rape and what could have been done with it.... but I suppose it's hard to get raped by an extremely unconvincing monster.


Well, that's all folks. Avoid this one. Do not be drawn like moths to the flame of Lance Henriksen! Avoid it like you owe it money!
59
Vote
   


Komodo Vs Cobra

May 24th 2009 21:38


There's something about 'vs'... The way I see it, having it in a title just means that means the movie will be disappointing. Friday the 13th was great, Nightmare on Elm street, great, Freddy vs. Jason... not so great. Alien, awesome, Predator, awesome, Alien vs Predator... not so awesome


[ Click here to read more ]
73
Vote
   


Blood Monkey

May 4th 2009 11:57


Premise: A bunch of students are enlisted by an eccentric scientist to help explore an as-yet-uncharted section of jungle, populated by undiscovered flaura and fauna. Little do the students know that the scientist has ulterior motives


[ Click here to read more ]
40
Vote
   


Lockjaw: Rise of the Kulev Serpent

April 19th 2009 10:50
I blame it on Anaconda.

Anaconda was a good movie, despite what all the nay-sayers say. The cast was, for the most part, good. Yes, there were exceptions. I don't like J-Lo in any of her movies, and Ice-Cube isn't the greatest actor on the planet, but I think Jon Voight is a superb actor, and Jonathan Hyde is always watchable. Anyways... Overall, the movie was good


[ Click here to read more ]
42
Vote
   


Moderated by Someone
Copyright © 2006 2007 2008 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]