Sharktopus

Perhaps I have been hoodwinked. Mega Piranha resparked my love of shonky B Movies like the adrenalin shot Vincent Vega gave Mia Wallace, and I immediately sought other examples.

I unfortunately forgot that adrenalin shots are not Plan A, B or C, but to paraphrase Earl Bassett in Tremors "something you do when a plan fails".

How's that I just referenced two 10 out of 10 movies to help me describe a 4 / 10 crapfest!

As good as Mega Piranha was in being enjoyably terrible Sharktopus is at being normally terrible – and the truth is both beasts (films) are only 5% different.

Sharktopus is an army funded genetically engineered amalgam of shark and octopus – if you couldn't have worked that out for yourself. It seems a little unfair to give the most efficient and dangerous underwater predator an eight leg up but they did it anyway.

(One thing I can't deny is that it would actually be a way more efficient predator given 8 legs!)

The sharktopus has a large helmet strapped to it that conveys electrical impulses sent by its scientist creators, this keeps it on the straight and narrow. Calamari control if you will.

No prizes for guessing what happens to the helmet?

...

Once free of control Sharktopus heads down the coast for some sun, surf and supper. Using the new octopian improvements and its sheer sharkiness – they can make up words so can I – it wreaks havoc on dozens of bikini clad terrible actors all the way to Mexico.

Back in the lab lead scientist Nathan Sands (Eric Roberts – he should ask his sister for some money and avoid these films) knows the risks and sends two more over-actors to recapture the beast… in some sort of seafood basket I would expect.

The pair are his daughter Nicole (who does little but tap away at a laptop and look worried) and a staff member he fired named Andy (who also seems terribly ill-equipped for the job).

Various kooky cats get involved including a hungry reporter and her reluctant cameraman, a crazy local drunk and dozens of dozens of middling bikini chicks. One thing I will say is that for a TV movie there was much cleavage and flesh on display – all PG stuff I assure you – none of it is A-for-Alba Grade but I appreciate the effort and acknowledgment of the inevitable viewing audience, it sure wasn't my wife who put Sharktopus on the DVD pile.

Anyway the entire movie should revolve around the beast so let's expand on Sharktopus. Aside from the afore mentioned enhancements the tentacles mean that ol' Sharkey can now walk on land – funny I never saw an octopus do that – it is obviously a cheap FX job and when walking looks like an overly elaborate hood ornament.

The CGI is also distracting in that it pops out of the screen rather than blending in, meaning it is hard to take the shark/octopus hybrid seriously… did I just really write that?

Let's put a bow on this sucker: While the CGI is better than Mega-Piranha it lacks the same clumsy charm, everything here comes off as calculated and try hard where the giant exploding fish film was cheese personified.

All the deaths are the same:

Bikini clad bad actor (BCBA) noticing,

BCBA wondering,

BCBA looks surprised (and often slightly in the wrong direction),

Tentacles appear.

Dead.

Final Rating – 4 / 10. As a guy I appreciate the inclusion of some T&A, even in the form of average women in bikinis and zero nudity. But it's the other T&A that better describes Sharktopus: Tedious & Amateurish.

This is no Mega Piranha, when given the choice I can't impress just how much better that is than this film. Where Mega Piranha was ridiculously terrible, this is just terrible.

Story, which is stupid and so un-original, you can read in other reviews and in plot-section. It is however very stupid and not worth of mention. Actually, think about word "Sharktopus" just for second. Yes, it is some secret government project which went wrong. That's all you need to know about story.

Acting? Visual/audio effects? Comedy? Fear? All together, very low. But that is thing you know as well.

The reason why I review this title is simple. I'm big fan of low-budget-so-bad-its-good movies. This is bad, cheap, but simply, not bad enough. Seems weird? Well, acting is not that bad, there are no very obvious movie goofs, there is some cliché in story but not much, anyway, it is bad, very bad movie, but trust me, for making-fun-of with your friends, better buy some cheap Asylum movie.

Saw this with beers and expected to laugh at the whole thing, but this was below all. I'm not sure why they made it in the first part...

The name of the movie is really the best part of it all. Period.

The effects are extremely unrealistic and there's no feel at all, as soon as the sharktopus shows up it's so detached from the environment to the point it feels like watching a cartoon blended with live characters or vice versa - in other words... too damn noticeable! Imagine a cartoon shark in a shark movie, would that put you off? If yes: Don't see this.

Not to mention the poor bloopers in it (aside from the sharktopus), there are a lot of mistakes all the time that also made me disconnect from the "story". This is a piece of CRAP!

I used to think Cabin Boy was the worst movie ever made, but I was wrong. There are no words to describe the terrible acting, the lame effects, the lack of flow, etc.

When the tongue-in-cheek jokes are predictable, you know it sucks. I attempted to watch it twice, but did not make it past two commercial breaks.

I am sure even Charlie Sheen makes fun of Eric Roberts for this movie. I just hope the other "actors" careers recover from this.

If you are looking to waste two hours of your life, there are better ways than watching this garbage.

Well, I knew it was going to be bad just because of the name. But I've been pleasantly surprised before and, as I've said in previous reviews, I also have a tendency to enjoy lame sci-fi/horror movies, so I gave it a shot. And boy do I wish I hadn't.

This film walks the very fine line between laughably bad and just plain bad. There were a couple of enjoyable moments. Not nearly enough to make up for the rest of the movie, unfortunately. I suppose it could be really fun if you watch it with a few friends, the sound muted, and make up your own dialog.

The writers clearly put some effort into it. Just... not enough. The dialog and characters weren't too bad. If only casting had chosen people who can actually act.

Clearly, the standards for acting have gone way down in recent years. Expecting Oscar-worthy performances on a straight to TV movie is unreasonable, but I do expect at least *some* talent. I don't think I heard one single convincing scream during the entire movie. There was a lot of physical acting (mostly running) required, so the screams should have been a breeze. Apparently not for this cast. I'm thinking the majority of them were chosen more on the basis of looking good in bathing suits than anything else. At least, the male lead was. Washboard abs aside, I wasn't the least bit impressed. The female lead was just as unconvincing.

While watching this, my mom made a comment about whether or not Eric Roberts uses his sister's name to get parts. I find that highly unlikely, particularly in this case. If he was, he'd certainly have used it to get a much better gig than this one. Maybe that's why he put forth so very little effort for the role. He does, however, pull off the required creepy, cold-hearted and extremely unlikeable aspects of the character. Sadly, his was the best performance.

The creature... Well, the name itself is a big enough warning. I am willing to overlook the fact that it's so unrealistic looking because of the obvious absurdity of combining a great white shark and an octopus into one animal and the clearly low budget. I suppose it could have looked cool if they'd had the money for better special effects. I'm also willing to overlook the fact that the tentacles look more like those of a squid than an octopus to me. (A very disturbing bit of proof that I need to lay off the nature documentaries, let me tell, ya'.) However, I do take some issue with the ends of the tentacles being sharp enough to pierce flesh like a spear. Seriously? The twenty-foot reach, suckers and enough strength to crush people into jelly wasn't enough? This little extra was probably put in just to add more blood and gore.

By the way, someone needs to sit the director down and explain to him that this is not a 3-d film and having fake blood splatter the camera lens is not cool. It doesn't make it look or feel more realistic and certainly does not add to the experience. It added to my eye-rolling, but that's about it. He also needs to tell his actors when they're doing a crap job. But he did get some really nice scenery and aerial shots in, so he didn't do a *completely* terrible job.

Basically, you may get a few laughs. That's about the only redeeming aspect of the movie. Everything else is just eye-candy and drivel. In my opinion, not even worth one watch. But I have seen a lot worse. If you want to watch it, have very low expectations and you won't be disappointed.