Bichos (Bugs)

Of course, if you saw that dreadfully histrionic earthquake disaster of an NBC movie last month, you know exactly what I mean! It's become my new standard for rating truly bad, unbelievably cheesy movies. The SciFi Channel's "Bugs" ranks right up there - or should we say it is merely rank?

With movies like this, it is almost as if the plot (such as it is) exists only for the sole purpose of tying together bombastic action sequences. In the case of "Bugs" the "action" wasn't enough to justify the convoluted story line. How many times did they recycle that same clip of the critters racketing down the rails towards the train?

How is it in movies like this that the scientist always has some expertise that takes substantial time, if not decades, to acquire, but looks younger than most women in Oil of Olay ads? How is that credible? Naturally, the purpose of such diversions isn't so much credibility, but good, clean entertainment for a few hours...oh, and exposure to the ads of the sponsors.

"Bugs" was utterly predictable, right down to the miserable end of Reynolds - when he picked up the pistol at the end of the movie, you just knew what was coming next. We had a ball picking out inconsistencies, predicting who was gonna get it next and laughing over the ridiculously cheesy effects.

I'll give it a solid Stilton on the CelluloiDiva Cheese-Meter and recommend for a night when you want to hold a "MST-it-yourself" party at home.

Its not Great, its obviously made fast but it is a hoot. You can sit back and laugh at not only the bad script and (lack of) performances but also revel in a film which does not have a single original idea. Every line every concept is stolen from Mimic,Aliens,Them,lake placid and even resident evil gets a look in. I also want to nominate it this film for being one of the few i have seen with only 1 exterior shot in the whole film. also the belief it could be a bear with insect mandibles makes it almost worth watching alone.

See it on a party night drunk

Okay, is this movie bad. yes. BUT WHAT WOULD YOU EXPECT PEOPLE!!! C'mon! And for a bad movie it's not that a bad movie. I've seen movies with bigger budgets that are worse!

The writing is formulaic, but fast paced. And like someone commented, no distracting love plots, scenes or whatever. Simply straight to the point action.

The SFX aren't that bad. lemme put it this way: it's a low budget movie. Don't go expecting ILM, WETA CGI or Stan Winston/Rob Bottin/Chris Walas SFX. But still - it's decent enough to do the trick.

The acting is mediocre at best, but again...its low budget! It's no Oscar material, but they do a decent job!

So where does that leave us:

BUGS is a movie that does what movies in it's class/genre should do. No more, no less. Don't go expecting more. At least it's not less, like "octopus" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0221905/) or shark attack 25 ;-)

If you like silly monster flicks, it will entertain you for about 80 minutes. Grab your popcorn and set you mind to zero. Don't think, watch, enjoy ;-)

A subway tunnel under construction, unearths metre-long scorpion-like bugs who awake from their centuries old hibernation with a voracious appetite for human flesh. After a police officer is all but consumed (save for the graphically depicted dismembered torso), FBI agent and eminent entomologist lead a SWAT team into the tunnel to contain and destroy the bugs, with disastrous results.

Economically paced with rapid momentum and frequent thrills, this made for TV action-thriller features a high-fatality rate, gory special effects and a couple of reasonable characterisations in the supporting ranks. Antonio Sabato, Jnr and Angie Everhart while initially looking overly alarmed, manage to tone it down as the film progresses. R.H. Thomson's performance as an easy-going engineer trying to right the wrongs of his megalomaniacal boss, seems (for a while) to only be capable of doom-saying and introducing myriad obstacles to the mission. But, as the story nears its climax, Thomson redeems his somewhat shady involvement, and closes the film with an unselfish act of heroism.

Constrained by the obvious made-for-TV budget, the insect special effects are sometimes hokum, but the visual effects department spares no body part in depicting gory mutilations, with enough claret spilled to run a blood bank for an eternity. Some credit must go to director Joseph Conti, who, as the credits display, seemed to have a hand in most of the executive roles. His tight, frenetically paced direction maintains a lively and energetic pace that ensures "Bugs" never labours like most of the subway cars do in the film.

it's terrible And it completely redefines my "bad movie" standard.

The plot is almost nonexistent, and all of it is bright clear within the first two minutes of the movie. Acting is so poor (i.e. people running from a bloody crime-scene with the same facial mood I'd have sipping a coffee early in the morning) that totally avoid you being involved in what's going on. No thrilling, no suspense, nothing; just a long, flat, almost ridiculous try to keep going 'til the end!

A must see if you want to think of every other movie you've watched "hey, they were not so bad"; otherwise Jessica Fletcher is even a better solution...