Sand Sharks

Well I certainly don't know the answer to that, and judging by what was on display here I am not sure if the movie did either. Haphazardly edited with cheap special effects, Sand Sharks is a poorly-made film, that is further disadvantaged by a number of other things including a soundtrack that is overbearing and in danger of slowing down the film, a script that is filled with bad puns and unbearably cheesy dialogue, a ridiculous and predictable story not helped by the witless premise, characters that are stereotypical, cartoonish and annoying and acting that is generally over-played and forced. The sharks are not menacing at all and their attacks are not thrilling or suspenseful in the least, plus how they are used in this movie is what makes Sand Sharks so ridiculous in the first place. The only redeeming qualities for me were the idyllic opening shot and the likable enough performance of Brooke Hogan, who managed to be the sole redeeming quality of 2-Headed Shark Attack as well. The rest overall was pointless and too annoying and ridiculous to be entertained by. In all honesty reading the reviews here excusing Sand Sharks' badness was much more entertaining than the whole movie put together. 2/10 Bethany Cox

If you see Mark Atkins as the directors name and you see the title of a movie that looks stupid or looks like a rip-off of a popular title then you know you will get ultra trash.

This here is no exception. But it's so strange to see the name Gina Holden on the credits. Face it, she has done so much excellent horrors like Saw 7, The Butterfly Effect, AVP and I can go on and on. Others here in this cheesy flick deliver performances from stupid ones to wooden ones. But also the CGI used is one to see. It's on of those SyFy quality and you know what that means. As bad as it can get. But I must admit that I somehow enjoyed it because they added some comedy towards this flick. If you take it seriously then you will hate this flick but if you watch it as a stupid flick then you maybe will enjoy if you can dig ultra low budgets. And the production didn't take themselves seriously because in this flick they even mention Roger Corman, so a big hint to what you will get.

It's weird that this is even available in a cut version although it doesn't have that much red stuff in it, except some CGI one. But the uncut version does deliver one gory shot of a copper being bitten in half, intestines shown. Here and there their are a few other nasty shots. Where they also added some comedy is in the fact that a voluptuous girl is getting undressed and is ready to show her juggs is bitten by a sand shark, funny to see and a big finger to the perverted ones out there. So no nudity here.

Get yourself a pint and some crisps and invite a few friends, you surely will have a few laughs. Not as bad as I thought it would be but still, cheesy as hell. And I wont go into the really bad and predictable ending....

Gore 1/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 2/5 Story 2/5 Comedy 1/5

Damn. I remember when the Scifi channel was a great channel. Battlestar Galactica. Caprica. Classic sf movies. Twilight zone (ok, they still show that). then NBC took over and the channel went down hill, linking up with those losers at The Asylum, where they should all be committed, and showing absolute garbage like this. This crap makes stuff by Shyamalan look good. I'm not even kidding here. Bad acting. Bad SFX, bad story. Bad everything. And then some idiot will say, "Oh it's a homage to the great B's of the past." Ha. These aren't even as good as the trailers of B's of the past. They should all go to Corman school and learn how to do things on a budget. I'm swearing off the formerly known as the scifi channel forever.

No seriously, what did I watch???

I didn't know whether to cry or laugh at the stupidity throughout the movie.

Sure the CGI isn't great, and the idea of sand sharks itself isn't exactly a genius' work, but that didn't really disturb me. I think the over and under the top acting was the worst part, additionally, whoever took part in writing the script should be shot. I've seen pornos or "romantic dramas" from 1995 with better scripts... (reference:"I like to play games").

I guess I would watch this movie again if friends came over and we would all get really really really high while watching the movie, then I would say it's an amazing comedy.

Plagiarism is defined in dictionaries as the "wrongful appropriation," "close imitation," or "purloining and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions," and the representation of them as one's own original work (as copied from Wikipedia) The filming, camera work ,lighting, music and even some of the acting is OK to quite good, but God O'mighty the idea, and even most of the scenes are exactly like Jaws. At least the beginning of it that is. I don't recall if there were any scenes in the film that were not actually predictable when it wasn't being copied from jaws. ah yes I do remember,there weren't any. I wouldn't say that this movie is a complete waste of time because some of the crews actually worked very hard on this and I wouldn't want to neglect their work nor efforts, however that being said I am definitely not talking about the writers, producers or director. They should know better. I am glad to have watched this at home and not at a theatre where I would have to pay a large amount for it.