User reviews

Reading about Carnosaur, I was expecting a terribly cheap movie and for it to be blatantly derivative of the Steven Spielberg classic Jurassic Park. While far from a good movie, and certainly nowhere near as fun, thrilling or intense as Jurassic Park, I was expecting far worse than what I saw. Diane Ladd relishes her mad scientist, and this is one totally bonkers mad scientist, and the baby carnosaur is genuinely scary. Carnosaur is also gorier and bloodier than JP, and the gore is actually quite good and has moments where it is used inventively to the extent that you may be put off eating for some time after. Carnosaur is a very cheap-looking movie though, the sets lack colour and the camera work and editing lack finesse and cohesion. But I agree about the special effects and the animatronics on the dinosaurs faring worst in this regard, they are truly dreadful and definitely some of the worst dinosaur effects I've seen for any movie in my life. The score is not particularly rousing and has nothing that leaps out as memorable. It doesn't distract from what's going on as such but it just doesn't add anything either, it's just there and fails to make much of an impact. The script doesn't work either, nor does the story. The dialogue is stodgy, cheesy and overly-talky, while the story- not doing much with a decent if rather silly concept- apart from some inventive gory scenes is stripped of suspense, scenes that should scare can be unintentionally funny instead, the romantic plot line is mawkish and slows things down in the middle and the prehistoric rampage antics do get predictable quickly. The characters read of every cliché the writers could find and are poorly developed, no scratch that, the movie certainly knows what it tries to be which is good but while it does strive for some fun and scares(though not really succeeding) the characters are almost completely forgotten in the process. Of the acting only Ladd makes any kind of impression, the rest just sleepwalk through their roles and don't seem to care less about their characters' situations. Overall, could have been worse, especially considering what I'd read, but not a good movie. I recommend it partially for those who want a bit of silly fun without having to think too much, but for those who does know what to expect but still want to see some kind of quality put into it they may want to look elsewhere. 4/10 Bethany Cox

I saw this film when I was 8 years old. Even then I was able to laugh at it. It wasn't a good movie, that's for sure. But the fact that I remember this film for its sheer mockability, well that alone is worth something. Not good, in fact it's terrible. Watch it if you want to be able to sit there and laugh at it with your friends. It's enjoyable in that sense, and isn't that the whole point?

"Carnosaur" is a film that can probably blame its obviously low budget on it being a missed opportunity. This movie contains many good elements including a very wonderful performance by Academy Award-nominee Diane Ladd. About half of the time, this movie kept me entertained in its own unique way and the other half of the time I was bored to tears. Thus, I give it two stars out of four. Half and half. Sounds fair to me.

"Carnosaur" is loosely based on a novel by John Brosnan about a mad scientist (Diane Ladd) who is disgusted by the human race's destruction of the planet and plans to wipe it out with a killer virus while genetically engineering dinosaurs so that they can take over the planet once again.

I was really surprised that film critic Gene Siskel, who had given the Oscar-winning masterpiece "The Silence of the Lambs" (1991) a negative review found this movie appealing and gave it a marginally positive review. But now that I've actually seen the film, I can agree with him part way. I still give it a negative review, but I do see why he might have enjoyed it. First of all, like I mentioned earlier, Diane Ladd plays a terrific villain in this movie. Even though she was given some awfully poor lines to act on, she somehow managed to keep me interested and even a bit frightened whenever she was on the screen. I'll say this; she is a lot more interesting than the dinosaurs in this picture. Perhaps the reason "Carnosaur" was even made was to beat Steven Spielberg's "Jurassic Park" (1993) to the big screen and make a little cash, which it did despite negative reviews from both critics and audience members. The film was made on a low budget and you can tell by the bad acting (excluding Diane Ladd, of course) and the poor special effects. The dinosaurs are seldom convincing at all. They are portrayed using rubber puppets and even though they are shot at night, they do become revealing at times. Sometimes painfully revealing. I also felt that the amount of blood and gore used in this film was way overdone, but that is typical of films of this grade.

And there is also one major plot problem in this movie. If the Diane Ladd character wants to wipe out the human race, why not just create the virus and not even bother with the dinosaurs at all? Why go through all the trouble and risk being caught? Of course, the dinosaurs were thrown in one because of the novel source and two to get people interested in seeing the movie, but still it almost seems as though "Carnosaur" would have been better, at least more logical, if there were no dinosaurs in it at all. And it also doesn't make any sense that she only breeds carnivorous dinosaurs and no herbivores. There are some strangely appealing elements to "Carnosaur", much to my surprise, and there are some ludicrous and unbelievably poor elements, as anticipated. It is just too bad I wasn't surprised more while watching this movie. A few re-writes of the script and a slight ante in the budget would have done it wonders.

Well, what can I say? I'm a huge fan of b movies, so I've seen some great big piles in my life. I was going into this expecting a poorly-shot, bad-humor-filled, crappy-effect-infused, pox-ridden Corman romp of "Night of the Blood Beast" or "Wasp Woman" proportions. I was rather surprised, actually. The effects were nothing to write home about, but they weren't horrible. At least this was before CG was on the open market, so they stuck with practical effects (which, in my opinion, are underrated). The acting was par for the course, but I feel Diane Ladd did a pretty good "mad scientist" with Tiptree. Mainly Raphael Sbarge was a good washed-up drunk with Doc Smith. Some things made the movie a little tedious (the romantic plot between Thrush and Doc, Clint Howard's character, etc.) but I found this an overall enjoyable cheesy gore-ride of fun weirdness.

Watch if you are used to horrifically cheesy movies.

4/10

Considering the three positive reviews right there on the cover of the DVD (one from Gene Siskel, no less) and its clear attempt to profit from Jurassic Park, I figured this movie would at least be passable - but it wasn't. It was shockingly dreadful. The creature LOOKED fake and when it walked, the camera angle made it look like a puppet. The acting was terrible, too, as was the entire concept. God, why did I waste two hours of my life on this?

This little Roger Corman produced film is pretty funny. It has some crazy scientist who thinks that people have violated and exploited nature and also animals for so long, that it is now the time for a payback. The plot is pretty confusing (as usual) but soon very hungry and angry dinosaurs are eating people alive in hilarious trash scenes.

The effects are OK and you'll love this if you like trash cinema. This is not great movie, but great in its own little category which has to be understood. If you only like mainstream s*it like Armageddon or Jurassic Park 1-3 then you'll hate this and laugh yourself alive. But viewed as a trash picture without significant cinematic or artistic values Carnosaur is OK. I haven't seen the sequels but will pick them up if opportunity appears.

5/10

This movie was a plain disaster, I saw on T.V and decided it's cheesier than mostly any Sci Fi movie out there. A scientist who's trying to destroy mankind with a breed of dinosaurs? The plotline is ridiculous and the acting is terrible. The dinosaurs all looked the same, fake and cheap-looking. The gore of the film is revolting and highly unrealistic. This film was far from scary, and a complete waste of time. I could go on bashing this movie but I have a word of advice for those curious ones out there. If you really want to this disaster film rent it don't buy it because you'll find yourself regretting it.

I find Chris Anderson (drmrvandertramps)'s "Special Moments" quite amusing. Disco Dinosaur indeed...

Like many others, I enjoy movies of the Mystery Science Theater quality. This film, though, was not even worth that. The story was horrible. I spent so much time just trying to figure out what was happening in the disjointed plot that I missed most of the acting and directing. The special effects were horrible. Many movies from the 50's and 60's had better special effects. The dinosaurs were horrible. Too many cheap, plastic toys. I've seen movies of better quality that have been made by people when they were high. It was so bad that I had to stop the second one after five minutes. Watching water drip from a faucet is a guaranteed 10 out of 10 compared to this movie.

Dr. Jane Tiptree (Diane Ladd) is a geneticist, who wants to destroy the human kind. She releases a lethal virus and a dinosaur with this purpose. A guy, called "Doc", finds her plans and try to avoid the destruction of the human race. "Carnosaur" is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. It is impossible to write a summary of such a crap. The story does not make sense, the characters are horribly developed, the "special effects" looks like one of those dinosaur "Made in Paraguay or China". When I saw the name of Diane Ladd in the credits and a production of Roger Corman, I imagined a big joke with "Jurassic Park", since Diane Ladd is the mother of Laura Dern. But the movie is so cheesy that never works. I like trash movies, like "Braindead", "Tromeo and Juliet", 'Bad Taste" etc... But "Carnosaur" is not a trash, but a crap Movie. If I can give an advice, I would say: Do not waste your time watching it! My vote is two.

Title (Brazil: "Carnosauro" ("Carnosaur")

I remember watching Carnosaur years ago when it was released. This movie actually bothered me at the time, especially with its ending. The movie doesn't bother me anymore, but I do find it very enjoyable and has a great re-watch value to it.

Diane Ladd has created a disease that only effects females. This disease impregnates them and causes them to give birth to dinosaurs with extremely bloody consequences.

Apparently, this movie was based off of two different novels but I don't know how true it is to those novels. This film does have a few really good moments of gore and shock. Unfortunately, the special effects for the dinosaurs is quite lame. But the movie is still a lot of fun. Look for a few cult actors like Clint Howard. Also, this movie has 2 other sequels which I would highly suggest missing. 8/10 stars

A brilliant but deranged geneticist Dr. Jane Tiptree (Diane Ladd) finds a way to bring Dinosaurs back to life by using DNA from Chickens Eggs! Which these Dinosaurs gets bigger by eating flesh's and creating panic in a small town somewhere in the desert. Which slowly several different kinds of Dinosaurs starts to breed like Rats. Which Tiptree is planning to destroy the world by unleashing an lethal virus and letting Dinosaur ruled the world once more.

Directed by Adam Simon (Brain Dead) made an watchable but forgotten horror/sci-fi effort by that was made in the wake of Steven Spielberg's Big Budget "Jurassic Park". Which this movie was out a few weeks earlier before Spielberg's take on Dinosaur. Which oddly enough, Ladd's daughter is the lead actress in "JP". For all it's cheapness, the dinosaur sequences are well done (despite some funny unintentionally moments of the F/X sequences). Which it will recalls films of the special effects era from the 1950's. It is quite gory as well, which it's delivers the good often in a schlock way. Simon's film is surprisingly bleak with some moments of playful black comedy but it is not quite fun as we would expect from a Roger Corman production. A cast of familiar B cast tries to keep it lively. The third act of this thriller is extremely unsatisfying and the quite dark looking cinematography of this film could have better filmed. If u want to see Simon's better work, watch "The American Nightmare". Which it's a documentary on the horror movies of the 1970's. "Carnosaur" is more of a curio movie than someone might actually enjoying. I always find it funny on the VHS Cover of this effort, since the late Gene Siskel enjoyed it very much. If u enjoy this, it's followed by two direct-to-video efforts! Based on a novel by the late Harry Adam Knight (Who's real name is John Brosnan). Simon wrote the adaptation of this depressing movie. (** ½/*****).

This is by far one of the worst movies I have ever seen and it has left a lasting impression on my mind, because it is so bad!

I don't understand how or why any sane person could write or direct such a terrible film. "Carnosaur" is a lame excuse for a horror movie. I didn't get scared once, instead I only wondered why the hell I rented it. There wasn't one character which I liked or cared about, there was hardly any character development, the dialogue is cheesy (as can be expected with this genre), the acting is laughable and melodramatic, the music is boring, the direction is bad, the makeup is fake and the dinosaurs...they look okay on the cover, but in the movie they move robotically and you'd have to be blind to not notice the cheap animatronics involved.

The biggest reason I disliked this film so much though, was because it was so dark. I'm not saying I'm a chicken when it comes to dark movies, I love them, but what I mean is most of it takes place in the dark, giving it a depressing feel and making it's low budget visible. Maybe the film makers thought that this made it more scary, but it doesn't.

Elements of the plot would have made great "X-Files" or "Outer Limits" episodes. Unfortunately the film makers decided to make this big steaming pile of doo-doo.

Whatever you do, don't subject yourself to this torture, if you are a movie lover you'll have unpleasant memories of this thing for the rest of your life. Go rent "Jurassic Park" if you want to see a great movie with lots of dinosaurs. 2/8

P.S. If you want to see one of the best movies ever made, rent "The Usual Suspects", now that's a great film!

Carnosaur (1993)

** (out of 4)

Diane Ladd plays a mad scientist who plans on returning the Earth back to the dinosaurs. She's created a special serum that will have women giving birth to the creatures and soon they will take over everything. CARNOSAUR was producer Roger Corman's attempt to cash-in on Steven Spielberg's JURASSIC PARK, which would be released later in the year. It's pretty funny that Corman was able to get this thing a theatrical release but sadly the movie doesn't live up to much because it's just a tad bit too mainstream for its own good. Overall the film does manage to get a good feel of those 1950s monster movies where there's really not much of a story and instead of one we just get a monster running around killing people. This is actually one thing that works with the picture and I think another good thing is that the filmmakers never take the subject or story overly serious. This works for a number of reasons but the biggest is that star Ladd takes the material so serious that you can't help but be entertained by her maniac style performance. I liked the fact that she was so serious in the movie simply because it adds a level of entertainment that you wouldn't have had had the actress simply shown up to cash a check. Obviously the special effects weren't going to be on the level of the Spielberg film but for the most part I thought they were good. Yes, it's obvious these things aren't real but that really doesn't hurt the film as they're at least entertaining for what they are. I think what hurts the film is the fact that it's a tad bit too pretty for its own good. With the Spielberg movie being what it is, usually these rip-offs try to just be exploitation 101 and CARNOSAUR really doesn't reach that level. The usually seen nudity isn't anywhere to be found and the death scenes are pretty lifeless and uninteresting. A film like this really needed to deliver for its lack of effects and story but instead we're just given a watered down version of a horror movie.

As solid as swiss cheese, as scary as Toy Story, as dumb as "Dude, Where's my Car", as cheesy as "godzilla versus the ice gnomes" and as about as confusing as the people who liked it. HOW ON EARTH COULD THIS MOVIE MAKE MONEY!! I guess suckkers like me rented it for the cool cover, and ended up blowing chunks EVERYWHERE! Why were the blood spots over the victims before they were even bitten? Why couldn't they get more realistic dinosaurs? ANd the mother of ALL questions is WHY ON THis #!%^@* EARTH ARE THERE SEQUELS!!!

First and foremost: THIS IS NOT A JURASSIC PARK RIPOFF. Stop saying and thinking that it is! It takes a minute to do some basic research and realise that. What it is is a CASH-IN. I believe that Corman bought the rights to the novel so he could a) use the cool name and b) lend his new film some notoriety, so he could say the CARNOSAUR franchise (which he owns...) predates Jurassic Park (which it does). He may also have bought it to prevent some other filmmaker doing it. But ENOUGH with the ripoff accusations. This is not about a theme park.

"CARNOSAUR" (1993, Simon) is a really weird film. It's a really nasty film that features a lot of gore but also some surreal gross-out stuff; some is reminiscent of Ridley Scott's "ALIEN", which is weird in a dinosaur movie.

I really like the aesthetic of John Beuchler's special effects. It's unapologetic in style but always goes the extra mile. The Deinonychus has a dreamlike quality to it. It's uneasy and never quite fits in but yet it's there all the same.

As an adaptation this film is a 0/10 because it is so far removed from the novel on which it is based that it might as well not have been an adaptation. "CARNOSAUR" was written by John Brosnan under the pseudonym Harry Adam Knight in 1984 and it is a good book that could easily have been adapted faithfully on a tight budget so why Corman opted for this strange sci fi horror is a mystery only answerable by understanding Corman.

Something about this film really irritates me but I just can't put my finger on what it is. The acting's not bad, it's off the wall and mad, and I at least like the sequels. Plus I would take the CARNOSAUR franchise over Jurassic Park purely because there's more onscreen Dino action.

This is as bad as made-for-cable ever got (and Junior, THAT's sayin' something). Bad story, bad scripting, bad FX, bad acting, bad directing. I'm glad I bought the tape out of the bargain bin, and this is coming from somebody who generally loves bad movies. The dinosaurs are really bad puppets and even worse stop-motion and one rubber suit worse than the other two put together. Like most made-for-cable horror/monster flicks, they go for the gore first and ignore everything else, particularly in the climactic ending which was almost directly ripped off from Dinosaurus, also a bad movie, but stylishly bad and highly recommended. If you can't rent Carnosaur for 99 cents, don't bother.

This movie is the most lousy movie out there, and the sad part is Jurassic Park came before this movie or the same year. If you are going to watch this one I recommend that you get ready to laugh, and when I mean laugh you really laugh because it thats bad. The movie looked like it came from the 60's with the horrible acting and the dinosaurs look like something out of Godzilla and Godzilla is twice the movie then this one. I would recommend watching the second one because that was even funnier then this one, but Jurassic Park and Godzilla beat this movie in the dirt. Please stay away form this movie. If you really want to see how horrible of a movie this is wait until it comes out on the Sci-fi channel or even on Showtime. Don't waste your money on this movie or any Carnosaur movies, even thought the second one was funny, but still don't bother spending 5 or even 10 bucks on this movie it should be destroyed.

This is by far one of the worst movies I have ever seen and it has left a lasting impression on my mind, because it is so bad!

I don't understand how or why any sane person could write or direct such a terrible film. "Carnosaur" is a lame excuse for a horror movie. I didn't get scared once, instead I only wondered why the hell I rented it. There wasn't one character which I liked or cared about, there was hardly any character development, the dialogue is cheesy (as can be expected with this genre), the acting is laughable and melodramatic, the music is boring, the direction is bad, the makeup is fake and the dinosaurs...they look okay on the cover, but in the movie they move robotically and you'd have to be blind to not notice the cheap animatronics involved.

The biggest reason I disliked this film so much though, was because it was so dark. I'm not saying I'm a chicken when it comes to dark movies, I love them, but what I mean is most of it takes place in the dark, giving it a depressing feel and making it's low budget visible. Maybe the film makers thought that this made it more scary, but it doesn't.

Elements of the plot would have made great "X-Files" or "Outer Limits" episodes. Unfortunately the film makers decided to make this big steaming pile of doo-doo.

Whatever you do, don't subject yourself to this torture, if you are a movie lover you'll have unpleasant memories of this thing for the rest of your life. Go rent "Jurassic Park" if you want to see a great movie with lots of dinosaurs.

P.S. If you want to see one of the best movies ever made, rent "The Usual Suspects", now that's a great film!

The worst of it's kind. With cheesy special effects & bad acting you know it's likely to be a Corman produced film. However, this complete waste of time commits the cardinal sin of taking itself a little too seriously. Where are the funny one-liners that usually spring up every now & then??? The only reason to watch this ( or catch a glimpse of it for 5 minutes) is to marvel at the downward spiral of Jennifer Runyon's career after "Charles in Charge". Don't waste your time. There are heaps of so bad it's good films out there - don't be fooled into thinking this is one of them.