Archive for Piranha 3D

Friday Night Knife Fights – Round 2 – 2D VS. 3D MOVIES

Posted in 2011, 3-D, Friday Night Knife Fights with tags , , , , on April 1, 2011 by knifefighter

FRIDAY NIGHT KNIFE FIGHTS:  3D MOVIES VS. 2D MOVIES – Part 2
With Michael Arruda, L.L. Soares, and Dan Keohane

MA:  Welcome to Part 2 of FRIDAY NIGHT KNIFE FIGHTS.  Tonight, L.L. and I are once again joined by Dan Keohane, and we’re continuing our discussion of 3D MOVIES vs. 2D MOVIES, or as we’ve been calling it, the great 3D debate.

Dan, thanks again for joining us.

DK:  No problem.

LS:  It took you long enough.  I was wondering when you were going to show up for one of these panels.

DK:  I was waiting for the right topic to come along.

MA:  So, last time, we were talking about AVATAR (2009) and we all agreed that of the recent 3D movies, AVATAR had the best 3D effects.

The 3D in AVATAR was so good, as I watched the movie, I definitely thought “This is how I want to see all movies, in 3D.”  Which brings me to my next question, and the answer is probably AVATAR, but I’ll ask the question anyway:  does anyone have a favorite recent 3D movie?  And was it your favorite because of the 3D effects?

I’ll start us off by answering my own question.

For me, my favorite is AVATAR, and it’s my favorite by far.  I’d never seen anything like it on the big screen before.  Depth, clarity, it was the next best thing to virtual reality.  I felt in such close proximity with the characters that I felt I could reach out and touch them.

But, as much as I liked it, without the 3D effects, it wouldn’t have been as good a movie.  I mean, the story it tells is average at best, and it certainly isn’t original.  So, yeah, without the 3D effects, it wouldn’t have been anywhere near as good.

LS:  Yeah, AVATAR is obviously the best of the bunch.

DK:  Great movie.

LS:  It succeeded beyond its wildest dreams. Usually, 3D effects are just tacked on, and the story is the main thing (you hope). In AVATAR’s case, the story was kind of weak and I think that without its visual splendor, AVATAR would have actually been a worse movie. It’s one of the rare cases of a gimmick IMPROVING  a movie.

MA:  I agree.

LS:  It’s the benchmark against which all future 3D movies will be compared. But it’s not a fair playing field. Few filmmakers will get the budget and the technical experts James Cameron has access to. So it’s a waste of time in most cases.

DK:  AVATAR is a clear case where the 3D is so integral to the film that watching it in that way is a must. Not too many films have been this way.  In fact, AVATAR is the only example I can think of right now—that was truly filmed in 3D and was a great movie.

LS:  As for other 3D movies I liked, the best ones have been those that don’t take themselves too seriously and use 3D in fun ways. Like PIRANHA 3D (2010), which I thought was a boatload of fun, using 3D for both the monster fish and nude women swimming underwater. The 3D remake of MY BLOODY VALENTINE (2009) wasn’t too bad, either. Then you have something like RESIDENT EVIL: AFTERLIFE (2010), which is such a simplistic plot – the plot was never the point anyway – that 3D just helps a movie like that become more like the live-action video game it wants to be.

DK:  The recent SANCTUM (2011) was also filmed in 3D, but the story itself, though not bad, wasn’t worth the premium we paid for the tickets.

I was happy that the producers of the final HARRY POTTER film, Part 1 at least, decided going 3D was just dumb. The plot, the story, was too important to somehow work in a yo-yo flying towards the screen to justify viewers hacking up a few extra bucks. Besides, everyone was going to pay to see the film, why make it any more expensive? Of course, PART 2 is going to be in 3D supposedly. That’s too bad.

MA:  Speaking of bad, how about the worst 3D movie you’ve seen recently?

DK:  If you remember my THE LAST AIRBENDER (2010) review, the 3D looked good in parts, but overall it didn’t help the movie, and I’d heard that the 2D version had much clearer, brighter imaging. The 3D seemed to actually darken the movie.

LS:  The worst examples of 3D movies are the ones where the technology has been added after the fact. Movies like CLASH OF THE TITANS (2010). It results in a muddy, crappy looking 3D that doesn’t really work (except for one or two scenes then made specifically for 3D).

Another example of this is maybe the worst of the bunch, Wes Craven’s MY SOUL TO TAKE (2010). Which I didn’t realize was in 3D until AFTER I LEFT THE THEATER. It added absolutely nothing to the movie. And it just pissed me off to know I’d just spent $15 on a complete turd of a film.

MA:  MY SOUL TO TAKE was so bad I’d forgotten it was in 3D!

For me, CLASH OF THE TITANS (2010) probably had the worst 3D effects.  They were the most underwhelming, that’s for sure.  Truth is, as most of the world knows by now, it was shot as a 2D movie, and the 3D effects were added later, and it shows.

So, would any of these 3D movies have been just as good in 2D?  Would any have been better in 2D?

LS:  Just about every 3D movie would be just as good – if not better – in 2D, except for AVATAR. Unless 3D is part of the movie’s DNA from beginning to end, it’s just a dumb gimmick. And a way to rob us out of more money for ticket prices!

As far back as HOUSE OF WAX (1953), if you cut out the scenes that were specifically made for 3D, it would not affect the movie at all.

DK:  2D movies are just as good. Like I said, unless the effects are so integral to the film that it would be less without it, almost every case I’ve seen could have stayed 2D with no issues. I mean, making THE KING’S SPEECH (2010) as 3D wouldn’t have made it any more brilliant. In fact it would have been stupid.

One exception, on a purely marketing basis: kids movies, especially CG-animated films, would do well as 3D for some time, mostly BECAUSE it’s a gimmicky fad, and children love gimmicky fads. Besides, CG-animated films look GREAT in 3D by virtue of how they’re “filmed.” it

MA:  I would agree.  I thought TOY STORY 3D (2010) looked terrific.

DK:  The question is, which force is stronger, children’s insistence on seeing the next great 3D animated film, or parents’ reluctance to pay the price for tickets? I’m a parent, so I can tell you the answer. I’m not paying.

MA:  I agree with both you guys, that these movies would have been just as good in 2D as they were in 3D, with the exception of AVATAR.  In the case of CLASH OF THE TITANS, which was not that good of a movie to begin with, the lack of unimpressive 3D effects would actually have made the film better, so there’s a movie that probably would have been better in 2D.

All right, that about wraps things up for Part 2.  Once more, it looks like 2D is faring better than 3D.  We’ll conclude this debate next Friday, and see if perhaps 3D can make a comeback, but the way things are going, I wouldn’t hold my breath.

DK:  3D is just too expensive, and it doesn’t make a movie better.

LS:  It’s a scam and a rip-off!

MA:  Like I said, it’s not looking too good for 3D.  That’s it for this week’s FRIDAY NIGHT KNIFE FIGHTS.  See you next Friday.  Good night everybody!

—END PART 2

Cinema Knife Fight Presents: THE WORST OF 2010

Posted in 2011, Cinema Knife Fights, Garbage, Worst-Of lists with tags , , , , , on January 14, 2011 by knifefighter

Cinema Knife Fight Presents: THE WORST MOVIES OF 2010
By Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

(The Scene: An old-fashioned “mom and pop” movie theater with fresh popcorn popping in the background, and real butter melting on the stove. MICHAEL ARRUDA & LL SOARES are dressed in blue jeans and T-shirts. They’re drinking beer while feasting on a plate of nachos.)

LS: By the way, what happened to the tuxedos, champagne and the fancy food?

MA: This is the WORST MOVIES OF 2010 column. Beer and nachos is as good as it gets!

LS: That’s okay. I like beer and nachos too.

MA: Me, too.

LS: And don’t forget the delicious fresh popcorn, which is sooo much better than the stale Multiplex popcorn and mysterious “butter-flavored liquid” I normally have to deal with.

MA: Someone should write a story about just what exactly is in that mysterious liquid.  I agree.  Popcorn at the multiplex just isn’t what it used to be.  Yet I eat it anyway.

I suppose we should be grateful we weren’t served water and saltines. Anyway, welcome to our first ever WORST MOVIES OF 2010 column. We’ll be picking our Top 5 Worst Movies of the year, based on movies we reviewed this year at Cinema Knife Fight.

Anyway, would you like to start us off?

LS: Sure. My Number 5 choice is INCEPTION.

MA:  An overrated bloated turkey if I ever saw one!  Good choice.

LS: Yeah, why go after low-budget movies with no resources? I’m gonna go after the big fish. When we first saw INCEPTION, I gave it a better review than you did, because I was dazzled by the visuals of the movie. I still think it looked great. So why is it on my WORST OF list? Because the more I thought about this movie over the months between then and now, the more I think INCEPTION was a major-league BORE.

In its effort to be so damn clever and complicated, INCEPTION thought that by putting dreams inside of dreams inside of dreams, we’d be pummeled into submission. But I can easily say that I never want to see this movie again. In a weird way, that van that takes 2 HOURS to fall into the sea epitomizes the entire movie for me. A lot of it is the cinematic equivalent of watching paint dry. Sure, it’s colorful paint, sure it matches the carpets okay, but it’s still damn boring to watch paint dry. I have seen the Emperor, and I am telling you, the dude is NAKED.

MA: If Godzilla had a mind-fart, it’d be INCEPTION.

Moving right along, my pick for the Number 5 Worst horror movie of 2010 is SKYLINE, a silly alien invasion movie that was simply dreadful.

It had fake-looking monsters, fair special effects, and very weak direction by the Brothers Strause (Colin and Greg). The film lacked anything resembling a memorable scene, which is amazing when you think of its subject matter. SKYLINE is so bad that it was even worse than the similarly themed MONSTERS (2010), a film that in spite of its title forgot to include monsters (okay, there’s a few monsters in MONSTERS, but it’s not called FEW MONSTERS now is it?). There are plenty of alien monsters in SKYLINE, but they’re about as frightening as Spongebob Squarepants and his pals.

LS: They’re all CGI and no matter how advanced CGI is, it still looks fake most of the time.

MA: SKYLINE also suffered from some very weak acting. Lead actor Eric Balfour looks like he’s constipated throughout the whole movie, and while I like Donald Faison a lot, (loved him on SCRUBS) he’s not so hot here.

The screenplay by Joshua Cordes and Liam O’Donnell left key things in the movie unexplained and sported dialogue that was plain and uninspiring. They also created a bunch of characters who were simply annoying.

SKYLINE flatlined.

LS: I didn’t think SKYLINE was great, but I had fun with it while I was watching it. It was just a big, dumb alien invasion movie. I was interested in seeing how it was going to unfurl. Sure, it’s not one of the best movies of the year or anything, but it wasn’t bad enough to make my WORST OF list.

And, for the record, MONSTERS made my BEST OF list—even if it did just get an Honorable Mention. I still don’t get why you hate that movie so much. I thought it was  really good.

MA: There simply weren’t enough monsters in it, and the few scenes in which the monsters did appear weren’t that exciting.  I found the movie stylish but exceedingly dull.

Coming in at Number 4 for me is DEVIL, a movie ruined by its title, and certainly not helped by the guy responsible for its story, our old friend. M. Night Shyamalan.

DEVIL was directed by John Erick Dowdle, who also directed the decent thriller QUARANTINE (2008), but unfortunately that’s where the comparison ends, because DEVIL is anything but a decent thriller.

It’s the story of five people who get stuck together on an elevator and find themselves trapped inside with a presence that is hell-bent on killing them one at a time, a premise that might have been compelling if not for the fact that the title of the movie tells the audience quite clearly that the baddie in this one is Mr. Horns and Pitchfork himself, the devil. Now where’s the fun in that? Things aren’t helped when the movie is set up as a mystery— hmm, I wonder what kind of creature is responsible for their plight? Could it be— the devil? Yep. Yawn.

LS: How did you guess?

MA: Common sense, dudes. If you’re going to write a mystery, don’t tell us in the title who the bad guy is!

The script for this one is a complete mess. Written by Brian Nelson, who also wrote the superior 30 DAYS OF NIGHT (2007) and HARD CANDY (2005), it doesn’t work at all. It plays out as if it were still in some serious need of revising.

By far, DEVIL was the most contrived movie I saw in 2010.

LS: I have to agree. This is one dumb movie. In fact, this one was so stupid it annoyed me. This is supposed to be part of a series of movies based on “ideas by M. Night Shyamalan” called THE NIGHT CHRONICLES. Basically other directors take his ideas and make movies out of them. I think DEVIL did pretty badly at the box office, so maybe the THE NIGHT CHRONICLES will stop with this one. I hope so.

Unfortunately, I doubt it.

DEVIL was Number 2 on my list. So I’ll agree that it’s easily one of the worst of 2010.

LS: My Number 4 pick is the big budget remake of CLASH OF THE TITANS in glorious…er, lame-ass…3D. The original movie (from 1981) wasn’t that great either, but at least it had Ray Harryhausen’s totally unique stop-motion animation to recommend it. The remake has nothing to recommend it. Sam Worthington, who was the only thing good in TERMINATOR:SALVATION and who became a star in AVATAR (both from 2009) is pretty much wasted here. His Perseus has no personality and his backstory is a snooze. And instead of Harryhausen monsters this time around, we get ho-hum CGI monsters and giant scorpions. Even the 3D effects are awful, since they were added to the movie AFTER it was made – so it wasn’t even originally filmed in 3D. Only one scene, with the Gorgon, seemed to be made for 3D. So not only was this movie bad, it cost me an extra 5 bucks for almost non-existent 3D effects.

MA:  CLASH OF THE TITANS didn’t make my Top 5 list, but I didn’t like this one either.  I thought it was middle of the road.

LS: My Number 3 pick for the WORST of 2010 is the new remake of A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET. This is another one that was just plain boring. The reason to see the original films was for Freddy Krueger, as played by Robert Englund. Sure, he was always making cheesy jokes and spouting corny one-liners, but Englund was terrific. It’s because of him that Freddy became such an iconic character, even if the multitude of sequels to Wes Craven’s 1984 original were pretty awful. You could always count on Freddy to be entertaining, even if the rest of the script sucked.

Recasting the role of Freddy was just plain dumb, and even though I really like actor Jackie Earle Haley, I think he was completely miscast here. His Freddy is humorless and tedious. And the attempt to make the entire story darker and more disturbing failed. Instead, it’s just grim and lifeless, without any impact at all. And boring. It’s a lifeless mannequin.

MA: I agree with you 100 % here.  I hated this one as well, and it just missed my Top 5 List, coming in at Number 6.

Coming in at Number 3, it’s MY SOUL TO TAKE, Wes Craven’s latest horror movie disaster. Who would have thought Craven could make a worse movie than CURSED (2005)?

MY SOUL TO TAKE is about a group of seven 16 year-olds who live in fear of the ghost of the Riverton Ripper, a serial killer who died on the night they were all born. The Ripper had multiple personalities, and on the night he was killed, the personalities or souls supposedly jumped ship and hid inside the bodies of the seven babies born that night. The teens start dying one by one, and the film leads us on a mystery tour of sorts—who’s doing the killing? Is it the ghost of the Ripper? One of the teens possessed by the ghost of the Ripper? Or is it the actual Ripper, still alive all these years later, since his body was never found?

MY SOUL TO TAKE has a lot of problems, but the biggest by far is I didn’t buy its story for one second. For example, its basic premise of the Ripper and how his personalities supposedly entered the teens when they were newborns is problematic. For this to be true, then the Ripper would have to be dead, for how else would a soul leave a body if it weren’t dead? Yet, the film also hints that the Ripper might not be dead, since his body was never found. Since these two storylines can’t both be true, it makes it very difficult to believe either one. It comes off as fake drama.

The screenplay by Wes Craven was simply horrible. The characters and story seemed to be a lame attempt to recapture the cleverness of SCREAM and A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET, but in this case it doesn’t come close to working since the story is so damned unbelievable.

LS: The “cleverness of SCREAM?” That’s pretty funny.

MA: I thought you’d like that.  MY SOUL TO TAKE was one of the worst movies of the year, a shame since it was made by someone once considered a master of the genre, Wes Craven.

LS: It’s been a long time since Wes Craven was a master of anything. I expected MY SOUL TO TAKE to be bad, but it was dismal! Easily one of the worst movies Craven has ever made, and he can’t blame a script by Kevin Williamson this time around (like he could with CURSED or those awful SCREAM sequels), because Wes wrote this one himself. Next time, get a real writer to write your script, Wessy.

MA: Okay, my pick for Number 2, is TWILIGHT: ECLIPSE.

While I didn’t pick this as the worst movie of the year, I will say that this movie and the others in this series have the dubious distinction of being the most BORING movies I’ve ever seen in my life, period, and if I have to see yet another TWILIGHT movie, I may not survive the experience.

I’ve seen worse movies than these TWILIGHT films, in terms of the way they’re made and the acting in them, but never have I suffered so much from pure boredom than I have sitting in the theater watching the ridiculous plight of Bella and which boyfriend—vampire or werewolf—she’s going to choose. It’s one movie during which I WANT people to turn on their cell phones!

I’ll also add that they don’t really deserve to be called vampire films. Even Walt Disney created more frightening characters than pale-ass Edward!

The sun can’t set fast enough on TWILIGHT!

LS: Yeah, yeah, this was an obvious one. It’s a horror movie without the horror. It’s vampires that have been defanged and werewolves that have been declawed. It’s romance masquerading as horror, where the members of a love triangle get to play dress-up and pretend to be scary creatures. PRETEND being the operative word here. TWILIGHT: ECLIPSE is a joke, and a bad one. But because there is an audience for this tripe, it continues to rake in the dough each time a new one comes out, and there’s going to be more sequels. So we have to put up with this stuff.

And you’re right. Sure, really bad movies deserve to be on our WORST OF lists, but so do movies that are just plain boring. Boring is the WORST thing a movie can be. And the TWILIGHT films are boredom squared.

On to my Number 2 pick. For me, it’s DEVIL, based on an “idea” by M. Night Shyamalan. How do I know this? Because his name is in big letters on the movie poster. Even though he didn’t direct it and didn’t write the finished screenplay. And yet, his fingerprints are all over this cinematic dud. I think we’ve talked about this one enough. It’s garbage. Let’s move on.

MA: By all means.  Continue.

LS: As for my Number 1 pick for the WORST MOVIE OF 2010, it’s a tie. Two movies so bad, I couldn’t decide which one was worse. And they’re ones we’ve already discussed, so I won’t belabor my dilemma, except to say they’re both awful. MY SOUL TO TAKE reaches Number 1 status because it’s dumb, badly acted, horribly written, and the 3D effects (we had to pay extra for glasses to see this thing) are NON EXISTENT. Not like CLASH OF THE TITANS, where there’s just one good 3D scene. In MY SOUL TO TAKE, there is not one moment where you say, “Hey, this is cool 3D, I’m glad I have these glasses on.” Wes Craven scraped the bottom of the barrel with this one. There is not one positive thing about it I can think of. It’s abysmal.

But there’s another movie just as bad, and that’s TWILIGHT: ECLIPSE. TWILIGHT may look better, may have slightly better acting, may be slightly more coherent, but the story is BOREDOM taken to a new level, and there is not one character I like or care about or want to survive by the end credits. Sitting through a TWILIGHT movie is like being tortured. Hell, both of these movies were pure torture to sit through. And I don’t plan to repeat the experience anytime soon.

MA: I agree, but for me, there was one more movie that was even worse than TWILIGHT:  ECLIPSE.

My pick for the Number 1 WORST HORROR MOVIE of 2010 goes to PIRANHA 3D.

PIRANHA 3D is nothing more than a GIRLS GONE WILD wannabe disguised as a summer horror movie. Shame on everyone involved with this stinker, including lead actress Elizabeth Shue, Richard Dreyfuss for allowing himself to do a cameo in this one (spoofing his JAWS character Matt Hooper), and, most of all, director Alexandre Aja for directing this fish tale.

The 3D effects in this one also failed to impress. And the blood and gore here was on the tasteless side, with a huge bloodbath scene, the centerpiece of this movie, that I thought went on way too long. It relied on shock instead of suspense.

The sex-obsessed screenplay was written by screenwriters Pete Goldfinger and Josh Stolberg. These guys also wrote SORORITY ROW (2009), another awful horror movie obsessed with sex instead of horror. Maybe they should switch genres.

PIRANHA 3D was by far the most disappointing film of the year for me. It was also the year’s most shallow film. A complete disaster from start to finish.

LS: If you truly thought that PIRANHA 3D was worse than MY SOUL TO TAKE, TWILIGHT: ECLIPSE and DEVIL, then you really need to turn in your critic’s card. You’ve always had bad taste, but this little number takes the cake.

MA:  Bad taste?  PIRANHA 3D was AWFUL!  It SUCKED!

LS  PIRANHA 3D actually made my BEST OF list as an Honorable Mention.  It was easily my favorite 3D movie of 2010—I thought it was a lot of fun—and at least the 3D worked in this one. It had naked girls aplenty and even more gore. The story was entirely tongue-in-cheek, and it wasn’t boring for a moment.

MA:  No, it wasn’t boring.  It was HORRIBLE!  Naked women and dumb ass gore do not a good horror film make!  And you put this on your Best of List?  You’re the one who needs to tear his critic’s card and go back to school and take some taste classes.  Give me a break!

LS:  There were so many worse movies in 2010. I am speechless that this was your number one pick.

MA:  Speechless???  Hell, there’s a first time for everything!

LS:  I have one more movie to mention. My choice for the BIGGEST DISAPPOINTMENT OF 2010. It wasn’t the worst movie of the year, but it was bad, and I went in expecting a lot better from the people involved. And that honor would go to George A. Romero’s SURVIVAL OF THE DEAD.

I love Romero to pieces. I think he’s directed some of the best horror movies ever made. He’s still the best director to make a flesh-eating zombie movie —hell, he’s the one who started it all. But SURVIVAL OF THE DEAD was a complete letdown, from the acting to the script, I just sat there with my jaw hanging open wondering what Romero was thinking when he made this one. But I still enjoyed it more than the movies I’ve listed here as the WORST OF 2010. I just hope Romero gets his mojo back sometime soon.

MA: And for the record, I really liked SURVIVAL OF THE DEAD.  It was a heck of a lot better horror movie than PIRANHA 3D!

(LS rolls his eyes)

MA:  Okay, that wraps things up from here.

LS: Well folks, we’ll say so long for now, and the next time we see you, it will be with the review of a new movie!

—END—

© Copyright 2011 by Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

PIRANHA 3D

Posted in 2010, 3-D, Animals Attack, Campy Movies, Cinema Knife Fights, Gore! with tags , , , , , , , , on August 23, 2010 by knifefighter

CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT: PIRANHA 3D
by Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

(THE SCENE: a peaceful dock on the water. L.L SOARES sits at the end of the dock, his feet dangling in the water, holding a fishing pole. MICHAEL ARRUDA walks down to him)

MA: You’re actually using a fishing pole?  I thought you used your teeth.

LS: The pole’s just for show.

(LS dives into water. MA looks on as there is thrashing and splashing, and the water turns blood red. LS resurfaces with a half-eaten fish dangling from his mouth, and climbs back onto the dock, covered in blood.)

MA:  That’s a lot of blood for one fish.

LS:  One fish?  I snacked on an entire school of fish, baby!  I was hungry!

MA:  You’re a regular human piranha. Speaking of piranhas—-.

LS:  We’re reviewing PIRANHA 3D!!  I’ll start this one.

MA:  You might want to brush your teeth first.

LS (swallows half-eaten fish):  Nah, I’m good. PIRANHA 3D is a simple enough tale. One day an underwater earthquake opens up a fissure at the bottom of the ocean, unleashing prehistoric piranha fish from their subterranean home. When this first happens, we’re treated to a brief appearance by Richard Dreyfuss as a grumpy old fisherman who gets caught up in a maelstrom. His presence at the beginning is an obvious homage to the king of all monster fish movies, JAWS (1975).

MA:  Yes, Dreyfuss’s cameo was certainly one of the film’s highlights. In fact, it’s probably the best thing going for this ding dong of a movie. Not only does Dreyfuss make an appearance, but while on his boat he’s singing the same song he, Roy Scheider and Robert Shaw sang on the Orca in JAWS, “Show Me the Way to Go Home.”  He also says some of the same lines he said in JAWS, like “Fast fish!” And, finally, his character’s name is Matt, an obvious reference to his Matt Hooper character in JAWS. Very creative, about the only thing creative in this movie!

LS: Oh come on! The first scene is fun, but it’s just an appetizer for what follows.

Okay, so the piranhas make a beeline for Lake Victoria, where thousands of college kids are celebrating the festival of debauchery that is Spring Break. Sheriff Julie Forester (Elizabeth Shue) has to decide whether to close down the festivities (Spring Break is how this town makes it money) when she finds out about the killer fish.

MA:  Gee, where have I heard this plot point before?

LS: No one said this was going to be original!

MA: It would have helped.

LS:  Another main character is her son, Jake (Steven R. McQueen), who has been given the job of babysitting his young siblings, when what he really wants to do is join in on the Spring Break shenanigans. There’s also the girl he has a mad crush on, Kelly (Jessica Szohr). Things get complicated when Jake runs into Derrick Jones (Jerry O’Connell), a Joe Francis wannabe looking for a local guide to show him some hot spots to film his nudie films.

MA: Joe Francis from GIRLS GONE WILD?

LS: Yes, Francis is the guy behind all those GIRLS GONE WILD videos. Except here, Derrick Jones runs something called “Wild Wild Girls.” And he brings two hot chicks (brunette bombshell Kelly Brook and blonde porn star Riley Steele) out to the middle of the ocean to get naked. Jake agrees to go along as their guide, and Jones convinces Kelly to tag along, hoping to get her naked, too (There’s a good possibility, since the ship they’re on is flowing with champagne and tequila).

MA:  Yes, most of this movie plays like a GIRLS GONE WILD video. So, I suppose, if that’s what you’re looking for, go see PIRANHA 3D.

LS: Yeah, a GIRLS GONE WILD video if you put it in a blender!

MA:  Exactly!  Which is something I don’t want to see.

(THE LOCH NESS MONSTER lifts his head out of the water)

NESSIE: Did you say GIRLS GONE WILD? I’d like to see that. I’m rather fond of boobies.

MA: Who isn’t?  I’m just saying they shouldn’t be the centerpiece of a horror movie!

NESSIE: Why not?

MA:  Listen, you silly serpent. What do you know about movies?

LS:  He seems to know more than you.

(NESSIE goes back under water.)

Jake’s young brother and sister row out to a small island where they get stranded. They’re supposed to be staying home, staying out of trouble, while Jake is away, so their mother doesn’t know they’re home alone. From this point on, it’s basically a game of chance, as we wait to see who lives and who dies when the monster fish finally attack. Not only that, but it’s all in 3D!

MA: Which is another reason not to see this movie. Because it’s in 3D, it costs more than your usual ticket price. The 3D effects are definitely not worth it here. While there are some shots that take advantage of the 3D and show some neat depth perception, for the most part, it’s wasted. And I thought the piranha special effects were awful!  The fish looked fake, cartoonish and anything but scary.

LS: Okay, so the piranhas look a little cartoony. I’ll give you that.

MA:  A little cartoony? They look horrible!  They’re about as authentic-looking as that fish on the wall in those McDonalds Filet of Fish commercials!  Give me a break!

LS (sings): Give me that Fillet-O-Fish. Give me that fish!

(Suddenly a school of piranha leap out of the water singing the chorus to that commercial ditty.)

MA (applauds): What can I say?  I like this song!

(RONALD MCDONALD swims by the dock, being pursued by a huge shark fin)

LS: At one point, Sheriff Shue is able to capture one of the fish alive and bring it to the local aquarium store guy, Mr. Goodman (played by Christopher Lloyd as yet another doddering old professor type), who identifies the critter as not just a piranha, but a prehistoric precursor – the first piranha ever – animals that supposedly have not lived on this planet for two million years!

The plot is simplistic enough. The acting is okay, for the most part. But the two main reasons to see this movie, aside from the 3D effects, are boobs and blood. This movie has plenty of both.

MA: I figured you’d enjoy the nudity. Sure, there’s plenty of naked flesh to go around. Trouble is, that’s not why I paid the big bucks to see PIRANHA 3D. Plus, in a movie like this, you know you’re going to see all those wonderful nude bodies bloodied up and disfigured eventually, and that’s not my idea of fun.

LS: What a killjoy!

MA: Sure, there are some great-looking bodies in this movie, but this eye candy in and of itself doesn’t come close to saving this shipwreck of a film.

And I found the blood and gore in this one on the tasteless side. That one huge bloodbath scene, the centerpiece of this movie, where the piranhas feast on all the frightened swimmers, goes on way too long and relies only on shock rather than suspense. This scene bored me. Plus it bordered on stupidity. I mean, you have police officers firing rifles into the water teeming with people. Not that realistic.

LS: Yeah, what was up with that? Shooting fish with guns! That’s pretty stupid.

MA: I’m surprised you didn’t like that.

LS: Come on now. Why use a gun when you can use your teeth? (Smiles to reveal his blood-stained teeth.) And what about the wonderful array of graphic wounds and flowing blood?! That certainly made the movie enjoyable for me. They didn’t skimp on the gross make-up effects or the fake blood—it’s all over the place. And lots of people get parts of themselves chewed off.

MA:  This movie stank, and the non-stop graphic wounds and mutilations are a major reason why. And you said it when you said “fake blood.”  The special effects in this one were horrible. So, not only are we forced to watch an endless array of tasteless mutilations, we have to watch lousy special effects to boot!

LS: Did we see the same movie? Because I really dug this one.

MA:  I wanted to like this one, but I have to tell you, within the first few minutes I noticed that the special effects didn’t look so hot, and from there it was just one thing after another.

(SIGMUND from SIGMUND AND THE SEA MONSTERS—a kids’ TV series from 1973-1975—scurries across the dock. He looks like a big pile of tentacles and seaweed, with a funny face.)

SIGMUND: Johnny, Johnny! Oh my gosh, where’s Johnny?

MA: He’s looking for his old pal, Johnny Whitaker. Do you think he’s still alive?

LS: Who cares. Johnny’s not here, you little mush-head.

SIGMUND: I know he’s not here. I just came by to do this. (shouts) CHUM BUCKET!

(SIGMUND swings a bucket, splashing them with blood and fish heads)

MA:  What the—?

LS:  (wipes himself off and licks his fingers):  Thanks for the snacks….mush-head!

(SIGMUND laughs and runs away)

LS: Where was I? Oh yeah. And don’t forget the extended scene where the two “Wild Wild Girls” go diving naked and perform an elegant underwater ballet together, and with the 3D you almost feel like you can reach out and touch them.

MA:  That scene made me laugh. Sure, the two girls here are beautiful, but I kept thinking, don’t they need to come up for air?  They’re down there underwater without breathing apparatus forever!  And I didn’t think the 3D effects added anything to this scene.

LS: Psst. I think that scene was supposed to be funny. Sexy, too.

PIRANHA 3D was directed by Alexandre Aja, who also gave us the remake of THE HILLS HAVE EYES (2006), which I enjoyed a lot, as well as HIGH TENSION (HAUTE TENSION, 2003) and MIRRORS (2008).He’s never been one for originality, which continues here (PIRANHA 3D is a remake of the 1978 Joe Dante film PIRANHA). The original had a fun script by John Sayles. The new film, written by Pete Goldfinger and Josh Stolberg isn’t as smart, but it does give us plenty of what made 70s splatter movies so good. Plenty of girls and gore.

MA:  I was extremely disappointed with the direction by Aja. He gave us one suspenseful scene in this movie, the scene where the underwater divers explore the mysterious cave for the first time. In a film full of bloody piranha attacks,this was the only scene that even came close to being frightening.

LS: Really, I thought the cave exploration scenes went on too long, and were kinda boring. And when they finally reach the prehistoric lake beneath the ocean, it’s a disappointment. Where’s all the other prehistoric sea life? All there are are tons of piranha eggs. I guess they ate up all the other animals. But don’t they have any predators that eat them?

MA: I found the main bloodbath scene in the movie—where the piranhas attack all the swimmers—boring, and while the final scene generated a little bit of suspense, it fell way too flat.

LS: I dunno. I liked it.

MA: A red flag was raised immediately when I saw that screenwriters Pete Goldfinger and Josh Stolberg had written the screenplay. These two guys also wrote SORORITY ROW (2009) which we reviewed earlier this year. SORORITY ROW was probably the worst movie I’ve seen this year, which means that Goldfinger and Stolberg have now achieved special status in my book, because now they’re responsible for writing two of the worst movies I’ve seen this year. PIRANHA 3D is horrible. It’s interesting that both their scripts for SORORITY ROW and PIRANHA 3D were obsessed with sex and extremely shallow in terms of anything else.

LS If I have one complaint, it’s about Steven R. McQueen as Jake. Boy, did I hate this character! He’s one of these bland goody-goody guys who lacks a discernable personality, and the movie focuses on him way too much. Are we supposed to identify with this uptight jerk who needs to take the stick out of his ass? I didn’t.

And I his young siblings were irritating as hell, the way they get stranded on an island and put themselves in jeopardy. Every time they showed those dumb kids, I kept hoping they’d get chewed to bits.

MA:  This is so much fun today!  Guess who was my favorite character?  You got it, Jake, played by Steven R. McQueen. By far, I thought McQueen, the grandson of film legend Steve McQueen, delivered the best performance in the movie. I liked his character, and I wasn’t turned off at all by his goody-goody persona. He could have been Clark Kent’s brother on SMALLVILLE.

LS: Yeah, if Clark Kent’s brother was made out of wood. Steven sure didn’t inherit any acting chops from his granddad. And Elizabeth Shue is okay as the sheriff, even if she never does get in touch with her “wild” side. She‘s a little too matronly here.

MA:  I like Elizabeth Shue a lot, but I wasn’t all that impressed by her performance in this movie. There were times when she seemed to be just going through the motions. To me, she didn’t turn it on until the end of the movie, when she has to rescue her family. Before that, she hadn’t really lit any sparks.

LS: I agree. Like her son, she’s boring. But at least Shue has some acting talent.

Ving Rhames is okay as her deputy, but he’s not given an awful lot to do. And director Eli Roth (the HOSTEL movies) shows up as a radio DJ who hosts a wet T-shirt contest.

I actually liked Jerry O’Connell’s character, even if he is pretty sleazy (at least he had a personality) and the two girls he brings along for the film shoot are real easy on the eyes (especially during their underwater “dance”).

MA:  I have to admit, O’Connell did a good job with the role, but I hated the character, so I didn’t really enjoy watching him. And I thought he was a little clichéd.

LS: And Jake wasn’t clichéd? How many goody-two-shoes teens have we seen in these movies, playing the hero? He’s much more of a cliché than O’Donnell’s character is. How about a teen hero who isn’t an uptight virgin?

MA:  I don’t think he came off as uptight. I think he was just reacting to the sleaziness of Jerry O’Connell’s character. And no, Jake wasn’t as clichéd. We see him act recklessly when he leaves his young sibling alone, we see him act heroic and we see him frightened. Jones we just see obsessed with filming and being a jerk.

LS: Less of Shue’s dumb kids (including Jake) would have made this movie better. In fact, I wouldn’t have minded if Jake’s girlfriend Kelly had been the main character instead of him. She seems a lot more interesting. And even though she’s sort of uptight, too, at least she has a likable personality.

The 3D effects work  better here than they did in something like CLASH OF THE TITANS, which just looked muddy. There are long stretches where the 3D doesn’t do a whole lot, but every once in awhile there’s a “jump in your seat” moment that makes it worthwhile. However, there is no way 3D movies are worth the extra price. Where I am, I had to pay $14.50 for a movie ticket that’s normally $11.50. And why can’t I just recycle the 3D glasses I still had from CLASH OF THE TITANS and AVATAR, and save some cash?

MA:  I agree that it’s not worth the extra price, and while I also agree that the 3D here did look better than CLASH OF THE TITANS, it did so to me because there was better scenery—the ocean, the beach, the bodies—but this had less to do with the 3D than the principal photography.

LS: Okay. You’re not going to get tons of great 3D scenes here. Just a few. But it’s not that bad. I just didn’t think it was worth the extra ticket price, that’s all.

I liked this movie and I liked the way it was a throwback to the wilder days of the 1970s. I also really liked the bloody free-for-all scene in this movie. It’s the most gore I’ve seen onscreen in a long time. Between that and the naked underwater dance, I give this movie three knives.

MA: I didn’t like this movie at all. In fact, it’s one of the worst movies I’ve seen this year.

LS: Are you forgetting the TWILIGHT movies?

MA: I’m desperately trying to!

The direction here is weak, as Alexandre Aja’s idea of something scary is having a girl’s scalp torn off by a motor boat propeller. The script is juvenile and pointless, with more emphasis on its GIRLS GONE WILD storyline than the piranhas. The special effects and the 3D effects are both subpar, and yet you have to shell out extra bucks to see this movie!  Don’t do it. Don’t waste your money on this poor horror effort.

PIRANHA 3D has weak writing, mindless direction, tepid special effects and a misguided emphasis on bloody mutilations and abundant nudity, two things that can contribute to a good horror film, but shouldn’t be its main focus. Isn’t that what the piranhas are supposed to be?  The main focus of this movie?  But they’re not. They’re just an excuse to get people into the theater to see this movie, which should be titled GIRLS GONE BLOODY WILD.

LS: Hmmm. I dunno. I’d pay to see a movie called GIRLS GONE BLOODY WILD.

MA:  Well, I give PIRANHA 3D a big fat zero knives. Skip this one and go fishing instead!

LS:. Fishing! I forgot about that. Time for dessert!

(LS dives back into the water. Soon afterwards, the water runs red)

MA: Looks like he caught something. Well, until next time, this is the Cinema Knife Fight guys saying; enjoy the rest of the summer!

—END—

© Copyright 2010 by Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

Michael Arruda gives PIRANHA 3DZERO KNIVES!


.

L.L. Soares gives PIRANHA 3D - THREE KNIVES!


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 83 other followers