Interesting how the attachment of his name has improved my take on this film, not saying it is going to be any better than any Sci-Fi Saturday creatue flick.Swoop109 said:I'll admit that because the name of Roger Corman is attatached to this film I'll watch it. Also, the concept and appearance of the beast to intrest me.
I'm going to have to agree with Iron Chef here. This movie looks so horribly cheezy and just plain bad...despite all this, I bet I'll watch it and ENJOY the cheeziness.Iron_Chef said:Roger Corman hasn't made anything good since the 1980s, people. His name attached to a project now is the cinematic kiss of death in my book, synonymous with crap perhaps slightly above the caliber of your average Full Moon movie. Dinocroc is going to be Dinocrap, can't you see that from watching the previews? Especially with the brain-dead, lowest common denominator rip-off of the Crocodile Hunter character featured so prominently and the godawful CGI monster? Sheesh!![]()
Ankh-Morpork Guard said:I'm going to have to agree with Iron Chef here. This movie looks so horribly cheezy and just plain bad...despite all this, I bet I'll watch it and ENJOY the cheeziness.![]()
Heheheh. Isn't his sad? We're discussing the problems with B-movies and I want to say "Whatever ever happened to thoat great B-Movies?!"...Iron_Chef said:Here's the problem with today's "B-movies": They aren't so bad they're good (as they were once upon a time back in Corman's heyday in the 50s/60s/70s). Now, they are so bad, they are BORING. Except SHARK ATTACK 3. That movie was so HILARIOUSLY BAD Sci-Fi refused to air it and sent it straight to video.![]()