Dinocroc

This is the first non-zombie subgenre review ive done but this movie is worth doing a review for. Dinocroc is a good movie in general but unfortunately it is still an obvious b-movie. The Dinocroc itself looked great but i thought the movie itself needed a little bit more weight as in action and violence because whenever the croc is shown or is in a fight scene not very much goes on except the croc is shown and the croc either kills or runs off in a repeated process. Jane Longenecker was hot which is a plus and the acting was better than average and the most surprising thing is that the croc looked fleshy instead of like a cartoon coughs* curse of the komodo*coughs. I enjoyed this movie enough to be glad that there is going to be a sequel which is more than what i can say about some movies in general. Overall 3/6 stars and worth a watch.

...In that this movie never seems to deliver exactly what it wants. I, personally, love cheap straight-to-video monster movies, but this one just doesn't satisfy enough. I was expecting Tobe Hooper's CROCODILE, but was left with the sequel. Overall, worth renting if you enjoy the genre.

1.5 (out of 5) Rated: "R" for some creature violence/gore, and language.

Summary: DinoCroc is what you get when you mix SNAKEHEAD TERROR and CROCODILE 2: DEATH SWAMP. Don't expect an oscar.

If you know what to expect, then Dinocroc, may not be such a terrible watch. The best word to describe it would be amusing, because it is just as unintentionally fun as it is intentionally.

The premise is your typical science experiment gone wrong. One night, a genetically engineered baby croc (prehistoric croc actually) escapes from a lab, and after a midnight snack of human flesh, it grows to full size in a matter of hours (now that's funny). A mixed matched handful of people go out to stop it, before it kills any more.

In addition to fairly weak acting, and visual effects that wouldn't fool a four year old, Dinocroc also has several blatant Jaws rip-offs. At the same time however, it makes a few wiser decisions. It chooses to avoid extreme gore, and clear sighting of the creature until the director feels it's time to move into action mode.

These movies are usually made for no more than a couple of million dollars, but Roger Corman has made so many that together they probably cost as much as Titanic. I don't know much about him, other than he's a veteran of the B-movie industry. I've chosen not to ask why he does this sort of thing. Dinocroc is not bad, there is better but there is also much worse.

Roger Corman makes entertaining movies, and he's made several giant monster movies for the sci-fi channel. Out of them all, this follows his classic style the most, including not so good special effects.

The classic style that didn't work includes the monster not showing itself, lots of people shots that are just fillers, and slow story development.

The special effects croc is a joke. It has no believability to its character.

This is a cheesy movie what people expect from a borderline B movie. Since this was first in line of many of this type of movies to come, it may have had budget problems. In any case, the movie itself was successful, and spawned many different super beast movies. The later productions has much better quality.

I couldn't warm up to this movie, and this is not one of the best of super monster series that came from Roger Corman's production.

An unscrupulous genetic engineering firm, conducting cloning experiments with crocodiles as a means to resolve the world's impending food shortage accidentally releases a specimen into the woods surrounding a popular lake with predictable consequences. Executive produced by Roger Corman, you might have hoped for better than this limp wristed CGI-dependent cheapie that features some capable and familiar faces. The leads are so busy getting into each other's pants, that poor Michael (Jake Thomas) is left to search for his missing dog alone, ending up on the Dinocroc platter. A grieving brother (Borlenghi) then sets about taking revenge with the assistance of Aussie game-hunter doubling as an ichthyologist (Mandylor) and Corman veteran Charles Napier as the local sheriff.

Joanna Pacula's role as the firm's chief could have been a stroke of deft casting, but she receives so little air time, her role is reduced to a caricature of the stereotypical villain. But even more disappointing is the reliance on CGI animation and post-production effects to create the action sequences with the "Dinocroc". Much of the camp quality of the Corman-inspired monster movie was in the flimsy, plastic construction of the title beast. Some of the sequences on the lake (take the water skiing moment) would have been far more entertaining were it not for the clumsy computer animation.

Co-writer John Huckert does a misguided Peter Benchley inspired cameo as a journalist – now punters will know his face as well as his name, which could jeopardise future writing gigs once you witness the quality (or lack thereof) of this effort. Choral orchestral soundtrack layered over the attacking sequences give the beast an almost unholy reverence, but the CGI effects are out of sync and the result is anything but precision or grace. If there's any redemption at all, you might draw visual relief in the fresh-faced and feisty Jane Longenecker who in spite of her lower order billing, is the constant presence throughout (and much better looking than either Mandylor or the "dinocroc").