Bugs

Two, maybe three years ago, I surely would have bashed this movie entirely and probably wouldn't have been able to mention one minor positive note about it. "Bugs" back then would have been just another imbecilic creature-feature produced by the infamous Sci-Fi channel and exclusively aimed at undemanding audiences over-enthusiast to see big monsters and loads of blood. But the (sad) truth now is that I've seen so many horrible and even downright embarrassing Sci-Fi (these days re- baptized as SyFy) lately that "Bugs" all of a sudden doesn't come across so bad anymore. Compared to crap like "Troglodyte", "Sharktopus" and whatever else, this a more than endurable movie. Like pretty much every other movie revolving on over-sized animals ever made, "Bugs" is a rip- off of Steven Spielberg's "Jaws". The giant shark has obviously been replaced with giant insects and the sunny beaches that must absolutely remain open during high tourist season have been replaced with a newly finished subway of which the opening ride with prominent guests absolutely has to take place. The rest of the scenario is fairly obvious, predictable and includes the possible stereotypical characters and clichéd situations you can think of. Still, the action sequences are quite entertaining, with above average special effects (director Joe Conti is primarily an F/X guy) and good old-fashioned cheesy dialogs. The explanation on where the bugs come from is rather grotesque and laughable, but hey, at least the movie bothers to provide an explanation. I've seen more than enough dumb creature features where the monsters' origins are never even clarified. There's some decent gore and bloodshed to enjoy, especially during the train's opening ceremony massacre, and it was nice to see sexy redhead Angie Everhart again. I will most certainly forget that I've seen "Bugs" in a few weeks from now, but at least I wasn't bored or annoyed while it lasted. That's already an accomplishment these days.

A subway tunnel under construction, unearths metre-long scorpion-like bugs who awake from their centuries old hibernation with a voracious appetite for human flesh. After a police officer is all but consumed (save for the graphically depicted dismembered torso), FBI agent and eminent entomologist lead a SWAT team into the tunnel to contain and destroy the bugs, with disastrous results.

Economically paced with rapid momentum and frequent thrills, this made for TV action-thriller features a high-fatality rate, gory special effects and a couple of reasonable characterisations in the supporting ranks. Antonio Sabato, Jnr and Angie Everhart while initially looking overly alarmed, manage to tone it down as the film progresses. R.H. Thomson's performance as an easy-going engineer trying to right the wrongs of his megalomaniacal boss, seems (for a while) to only be capable of doom-saying and introducing myriad obstacles to the mission. But, as the story nears its climax, Thomson redeems his somewhat shady involvement, and closes the film with an unselfish act of heroism.

Constrained by the obvious made-for-TV budget, the insect special effects are sometimes hokum, but the visual effects department spares no body part in depicting gory mutilations, with enough claret spilled to run a blood bank for an eternity. Some credit must go to director Joseph Conti, who, as the credits display, seemed to have a hand in most of the executive roles. His tight, frenetically paced direction maintains a lively and energetic pace that ensures "Bugs" never labours like most of the subway cars do in the film.

As far as cheesy made for television genre movies with digital effects go, "Bugs" offers a decent enough diversion. It stars Antonio Sabato, Jr. as an FBI agent named Pollack who is on the trail of a serial killer. The trail leads him to a totally unrelated circumstance, that of enormous, bloodthirsty insects terrorizing a subway tunnel that is under construction. He teams with a sexy insect expert, Dr. Emily Foster (Angie Everhart) to save the day.

'Bugs' has a pretty routine script, with routine and annoying characters for the most part. There is a pathologically greedy tycoon (Karl Pruner) who doesn't want ANYTHING to spoil his plans. This character is set up as being so reprehensible (and over the top) that you keep waiting for him to get his comeuppance. There's also a team of commandos, turned into chopped meat by the rampaging critters.

Anybody watching will automatically peg this as a typical "Aliens" wannabe, hampered by the constraints of TV level budgeting, uneven CGI (but fairly well designed bugs), dumb dialogue, and some lame performances. Sabato is an extremely stoic hero, the kind of guy who only ever seems to have one expression on his face. Everhart is quite easy to watch, playing the kind of tough, capable heroine who has brains to match her hotness. Veteran Canadian character actor R.H. Thomson makes the most of his role as the hotshot who designed and built these tunnels. Horror buffs will enjoy seeing the lovely Lynne Griffin ("Black Christmas" '74, "Curtains") in a cameo as the Deputy Medical Examiner.

Mildly thrilling at best, with a fortunately decent pace and short running time (if you watch it on DVD) that keeps it from being too painful.

Five out of 10.

Okay, is this movie bad. yes. BUT WHAT WOULD YOU EXPECT PEOPLE!!! C'mon! And for a bad movie it's not that a bad movie. I've seen movies with bigger budgets that are worse!

The writing is formulaic, but fast paced. And like someone commented, no distracting love plots, scenes or whatever. Simply straight to the point action.

The SFX aren't that bad. lemme put it this way: it's a low budget movie. Don't go expecting ILM, WETA CGI or Stan Winston/Rob Bottin/Chris Walas SFX. But still - it's decent enough to do the trick.

The acting is mediocre at best, but again...its low budget! It's no Oscar material, but they do a decent job!

So where does that leave us:

BUGS is a movie that does what movies in it's class/genre should do. No more, no less. Don't go expecting more. At least it's not less, like "octopus" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0221905/) or shark attack 25 ;-)

If you like silly monster flicks, it will entertain you for about 80 minutes. Grab your popcorn and set you mind to zero. Don't think, watch, enjoy ;-)

This movie doesn't just disappoint, it irritates you with poor acting, moronic story, poor special effects and situations such as shooting a creature and not hurting it, yet hit it with a stick and you can hurt it enough to chase it off...

If it wasn't so poorly made, it could be a comedy. In fact, some of the actors even have smiles while talking about their "dire situations" or ways to possibly save their lives.

Finally, trying to add a "touching moment" to this type of movie isn't advisable... and, if done anyhow, make it at least a little bit realistic, please!!!

There's enough corn in this movie to make enough ethanol to fuel the world.