Dickshark

Apparently there are different versions of this film as there seem to be versions which differ in length. Several sites/reviewers have pointed out that they watched a version which is about 2 hours 30 minutes. However the version having watched was slight over 1 hour 34 minutes.

As expected this film isn't great but expected something more creative and more over the top given its title. Its clear Bill Zebub isn't exactly trying as these films don't seem too take long to make. "Dickshark" is essentially an low budget adult film of sorts disguised as an artistic indie.

The acting is stale, the comedy isn't funny and the sharks are entirely too fake looking. Based on the plot synopsis before watching, we knew it isn't to be taken serious. Also does not much make sense, as are we to believe the little "shark" in the opening scene is the same one that appears throughout the film and in the end?

Similar to Holocaust Cannibal, this features most of the women appearing nude with silly nonsense dialogue, background music and slow motion fights.

This entire movie is in slow motion, and it's TWO AND A HALF HOURS LONG.

I wanted to die after 5 minutes.

Low budget filmmaker Bill Zebub made this really bizarre, dirty and just flat out crazy film about a guy who uses a genital growth lotion and turns his penis to a shark. It would be a crazy fun film it id didnt have a run time of 2hr. 29 min. Seriously its 2 and a half hours. Anyway its cool to see Erin Brown again. Haven't seen her in a while.

Right, well with a movie titled "Dickshark", then I have to say that I had absolutely zero expectations for this 2016 movie. I happened to stumble upon it by random chance, and opted to give the movie a chance, on the chance of it being a bizarre comedy.

I was wrong. Boy, how I was wrong. This movie is atrocious. It wasn't a comedy at all. This was a lewd low budget sleaze-fest of an adult movie. Yeah, nothing worthwhile to sit down here for. In fact, do yourself a favor and stay well clear of this dumpster fire of a movie from writer and director Bill Zebub.

The storyline in "Dickshark" was laughable, non-existing and just downright stupid. But then again, does sleazy movies really need a storyline? Well, it does if you were expecting it to be something quite different than what it turned out to be.

The acting performances in this movie, and I use the word "movie" with a grain of salt here, was amateurish, sluggish, wooden, rigid and not really worth watching. Needless to say that I wasn't familiar with a single performer on the cast list here, nor were I inspired to rush out to acquire other movies of anyone on the cast list here.

The special effects were non-existing. So don't get your hopes up.

Bad production, bad acting, bad writing and bad cinematography hardly constitutes a proper movie.

My rating of "Dickshark" from writer and director Bill Zebub lands on a one out of ten stars. This is definitely one of the worst movies I have stumbled upon in a long, long time.

I have mixed impressions about this title.

Production is cheap. Lighting and cinematography are dreadful. The pace is glacial, the editing frustrating, and why oh why so much slo-mo?

There's a lot of female nudity, and all the actors are obviously there for the love of it because no-one is taking themselves, the nudity or the film too seriously. They can't even suppress their mirth at times. I can forgive the cheap props, gratuitous boob shots and micro-budget film-making because the ideas expressed are quite high-brow.

Others are complaining about the dialogue. It initially comes across as silly stuff, what seems to be many ad libs, off on tangents and probably a lot was shot in one take. There are gaps in the dialogue, the actors break eyeline, look at the camera or over to where I suspect the script is available to be read off camera. The script is at times frustrating and could have been shot and edited much, much better.

But the thing that surprised me within the eccentric dialogue are the observations and commentary on modern society, such as myths and clichés accepted as fact, the poor discipline in modern education and then, importantly, the call-back to a classic by Mary Shelley.

**Ding!** Dick is a modern Victor Frankenstein, destroyed by his own power and one of his own creations. The dialogue up to that moment has reflected Shelley's themes on the uneducated and the use of knowledge for good or evil. Does Dick even consider science for good or bad, or is the pursuit of science its own reward, as well as an excuse for fondling breasts?

High brow conversation and low brow visuals.

Is this porn? No, female nudity is not porn, besides which there are no male actor's bits seen on the screen. "Dickshark" is a direct descendant of the monster-nudie and nudie-cuties of the 60's. Remember Francis Ford Coppola's first couple of movies - "The Bellboy and the Playgirls" and "Tonight for Sure"? Who could foresee "The Godfather" series or "Apocalypse Now" from those nudie-cutie origins?

I make note of a few minutes dedicated to music credits at the end. I respect Bill Zebub's effort here of one artist promoting other collaborating artists. But Bill, if you read this, please get a fresh pair of eyes to check your spelling before delivering the final product. Mistakes abound!

In summary, if you can endure the glacial pace and many shortcomings in the craft of film-making evident in "Dickshark" there is a high concept running underneath all the boob shots and ridiculous props. .....and it pays to know Mary Shelley's writing.